Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Eroginous]

I think people are misinterpreting what I was saying. Background checks should be fine because they're only a moderate hindrance to law-abiding citizens. Bans are an intrusive restriction that doesn't realistically hinder criminal purchases but make it impossible for law-abiding citizens for very little gain.

The way you said it made it sound like only an outright ban would be a good move.

California, for example, makes the purchasing party pay for the background check, so the money involved is not really an issue in the long run. I'm not saying this plan will have overwhelming effect, but it's worth doing nonetheless. And none of this precludes other methods to reduce crime.

I'm not talking about the cost of individual background checks. I'm talking about the money being raised and spent on the manpower to enact legislation which would mandate background checks. Couldn't that money be better spent on more effective legislation?

You want them to have the right to own these easymode killing devices, what you think they exist for? opening beer bottles?

Guns are used for sport, recreation, protection, and deterrence. Please stop acting like the only purpose guns serve is to kill other living things. That's the most common logical fallacy committed in this argument, and you're not original for making it.

The ideal society is one where everyone is armed and no one ever has to use their gun against someone else. In that society everyone understands the impact of using their gun to commit a crime and what will happen if they do.

[lockedout]

You want them to have the right to own these easymode killing devices, what you think they exist for? opening beer bottles?

A gun can be used for other things besides killing.
They do not exist solely to kill.

In fact many people who regularly shoot guns have never killed anything.

[Himora]

A gun can be used for other things besides killing.
They do not exist solely to kill.

Guns were created to kill easily, effectively & efficiently. it really is as simple as that.

[Deleted]

Stop comparing guns to cars.

Bearing arms is a constitutional right.
Driving is a privilege.

Reading comprehension for the win. I was stating that comparing them WAS WRONG.

But whatever, make an argument out of nothing....

[lockedout]

Reading comprehension for the win. I was stating that comparing them WAS WRONG.

But whatever, make an argument out of nothing....

Sometimes people quote the wrong post, this is one of those times.
I am sorry you are so mad.

[Deleted]

Stop comparing guns to cars.

Bearing arms is a constitutional right.
Driving is a privilege.

And that's where the whole problem is. Since the "bearing arms" part was always regulated. So adding extra layers to make sure you are the "law abiding citizen" you always think you are is not infringing on your right but making sure for everyone else that you that person. And on top of the limit the firepower you can purchase, since you are afterall an untrained citizen with no real need of amy/police grade firepower since you are neither of them.

[Deadvolcanoes]

So here's another terrible story from Connecticut. A grandmother took her two grandchildren out of day care, and eventually shot them to death. I actually got a text message from the state when an amber alert was issued for their disappearance.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...-day-care?lite

Here's the real point of this story:

Jeremy and Brenda Perry, parents of the two young boys, told NBC Connecticut that Denison had a gun and she had a mental illness.

I'm sorry but if you know someone has a mental illness, you shouldn't allow them to have a firearm. I would support a law making it mandatory to report the possession of a firearm by an individual with a mental illness.

[Grizzly Willy]

Guns were created to kill easily, effectively & efficiently. it really is as simple as that.

What they are created for doesn't equal the only thing they are able to be used for.

[lockedout]

So here's another terrible story from Connecticut. A grandmother took her two grandchildren out of day care, and eventually shot them to death. I actually got a text message from the state when an amber alert was issued for their disappearance.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...-day-care?lite

Here's the real point of this story:



I'm sorry but if you know someone has a mental illness, you shouldn't allow them to have a firearm. I would support a law making it mandatory to report the possession of a firearm by an individual with a mental illness.

The problem is the level of mental illness, or what the government would classify as mentally ill.

[Deleted]

What they are created for doesn't equal the only thing they are able to be used for.

The only other uses for firearms are to practice killing things. Clay/skeet shooting, plinking, long distance target shooting......All practice for the real thing.

[Deadvolcanoes]

The problem is the level of mental illness, or what the government would classify as mentally ill.

So do you believe people that have just minor mental illnesses should be able to possess a firearm?

[lockedout]

The only other uses for firearms are to practice killing things. Clay/skeet shooting, plinking, long distance target shooting......All practice for the real thing.

That's not true. Some people do it for the sport of competition and would never shoot a living creature.

---------- Post added 2013-02-27 at 03:28 PM ----------

So do you believe people that have just minor mental illnesses should be able to possess a firearm?

It's a slippery slope. It depends what you consider "mental illness".
What if you are prescribed xanax from your doctor. Are you now considered mentally ill?
I wouldn't say someone on xanax is "mentally ill" but who knows how the government will classify a "mentally ill" person.

I know what you mean by mentally ill and I agree they shouldn't have access to firearms or any weapons. The problem is where do you draw the line between who is ill and who isn't?

[GreatOak]

---------- Post added 2013-02-27 at 03:31 PM ----------

Mentally Ill people don't deserve to be stigmatized even further. I would be careful when proposing things that effect the mentally ill.

[Deadvolcanoes]

I know what you mean by mentally ill and I agree they shouldn't have access to firearms or any weapons. The problem is where do you draw the line between who is ill and who isn't?

We have very solid definitions as to what constitutes a mental illness. We should be seeking the advice of professionals.

http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness

A mental illness is a medical condition that disrupts a person's thinking, feeling, mood, ability to relate to others and daily functioning.

[lockedout]

We have very solid definitions as to what constitutes a mental illness. We should be seeking the advice of professionals.

http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=By_Illness

I just see huge problems with these definitions.

A mental illness is a medical condition that disrupts a person's thinking, feeling, mood, ability to relate to others and daily functioning. Just as diabetes is a disorder of the pancreas, mental illnesses are medical conditions that often result in a diminished capacity for coping with the ordinary demands of life.

Serious mental illnesses include major depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), panic disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and borderline personality disorder. The good news about mental illness is that recovery is possible.

Mental illnesses can affect persons of any age, race, religion or income. Mental illnesses are not the result of personal weakness, lack of character or poor upbringing. Mental illnesses are treatable. Most people diagnosed with a serious mental illness can experience relief from their symptoms by actively participating in an individual treatment plan.

[Deadvolcanoes]

Mentally Ill people don't deserve to be stigmatized even further. I would be careful when proposing things that effect the mentally ill.

Disallowing someone with a mental illness to obtain a firearm isn't a stigmatization. It's a common sense law. Many studies have shown that individuals with mental illnesses are two to three times as likely to be involved in violent acts.

---------- Post added 2013-02-27 at 10:46 AM ----------

I just see huge problems with these definitions.

I'm not concerned about it. If a medical professional diagnoses you with a mental illness, I see no reason for you to possess a firearm.

[FusedMass]

Senate Assault Weapons Ban Hearing To Include Testimony From Newtown Father, Doctor

Heslin, a 50-year-old construction worker, says he normally pays little attention to politics. But he was yanked painfully into the middle of the nation's gun debate last December, when his 6-year-old son, Jesse, along with 19 other first-graders and six educators, was shot dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

"It's a burden, it's more than a burden on me," Heslin said in an interview Tuesday as he and three dozen others - including other Newtown families and relatives of other mass shooting victims - arrived in Washington for two days of lobbying lawmakers. "But I have to do it for my little boy."

Heslin is set to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday in support of legislation by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to ban assault weapons.

Other witnesses testifying to the Senate panel include William Begg, an emergency room doctor who treated Newtown victims that day, and U.S. attorney John Walsh from Colorado.

"Guns that are fashioned from war don't belong on the streets," Feinstein said Tuesday, acknowledging that her legislation to ban assault weapons faced difficult odds in Congress. "Maybe I've just seen too much from my days as mayor and watching this stuff for 30 years."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2772834.html

Just thought I'd share this information.

[Bakis]

Spot on!

"Guns that are fashioned from war don't belong on the streets," Feinstein said Tuesday, acknowledging that her legislation to ban assault weapons faced difficult odds in Congress. "Maybe I've just seen too much from my days as mayor and watching this stuff for 30 years."

Sadly alot of people feel they need the 'best suitable' weapon to defend their home and against the future government turning onto the people.
In the meantime they are happy not sticking with a shotgun that would work just fine and a few extra hundred dead americans, after all "What do I care, I didn't know him".

[lockedout]

"Guns that are fashioned from war don't belong on the streets," Feinstein said Tuesday, acknowledging that her legislation to ban assault weapons faced difficult odds in Congress. "Maybe I've just seen too much from my days as mayor and watching this stuff for 30 years."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2772834.html



Just thought I'd share this information.

What guns aren't?

[Deleted]

That's not true. Some people do it for the sport of competition and would never shoot a living creature.

---------- Post added 2013-02-27 at 03:28 PM ----------



It's a slippery slope. It depends what you consider "mental illness".
What if you are prescribed xanax from your doctor. Are you now considered mentally ill?
I wouldn't say someone on xanax is "mentally ill" but who knows how the government will classify a "mentally ill" person.

I know what you mean by mentally ill and I agree they shouldn't have access to firearms or any weapons. The problem is where do you draw the line between who is ill and who isn't?

Which still stems from the practice of hunting. Firearms exist for one reason only, to fire bullets.