Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Raintola]

Uh...no, they didn't. You need a refresher course on history.

Go look up the concept behind "nearly." The Federal Army was a bumbling shamble in the first two years of the war. They let the Confederates escape after Second Bull Run due to sheer incompetence, which repeated itself after Gettysburg. They were practically broken at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, again due to incompetence. The South started the war with far larger numbers of experienced field officers, which gave them a huge advantage that they readily exploited many times, especially early on. Unfortunately, due to lack of supplies and a generally terrible Congress, they lost.

Even then, my point still stands. It's happened before, no reason why it shouldn't happen again. You'd think that with his push on healthcare that Obama would look into making mental healthcare a more sought-after solution. Instead of banning guns and making the sane, law-abiding citizen take punishment for the actions of an obviously deranged person, why not use those resources to help these people instead of leaving them to stew in their insanity until they snap?

[Rukentuts]

everything i've said to you is 100% accurate. show me something that isn't.

Yeah, that's why you have sources for your claims.

FYI: Saying "prove me wrong" is a fallacy, and not a valid argument. Thanks for proving me right.

[Sealed Shut]

I'd like to know how you got to that conclusion.
Regarding bananas, I'm sure you can do it if you really push yourself.

you obviously feel that the military would turn on the citizens at the command of the POTUS. this is simply NOT the case. if you were informed at all about the military you would know why. That is how i came to the conclusion.

never heard anyone use the word bananas like you did. so unless you clarify what you mean, it's a dead horse.

[Rukentuts]

Go look up the concept behind "nearly." The Federal Army was a bumbling shamble in the first two years of the war. They let the Confederates escape after Second Bull Run due to sheer incompetence, which repeated itself after Gettysburg. They were practically broken at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, again due to incompetence. The South started the war with far larger numbers of experienced field officers, which gave them a huge advantage that they readily exploited many times, especially early on. Unfortunately, due to lack of supplies and a generally terrible Congress, they lost.

Even then, my point still stands. It's happened before, no reason why it shouldn't happen again. You'd think that with his push on healthcare that Obama would look into making mental healthcare a more sought-after solution. Instead of banning guns and making the sane, law-abiding citizen take punishment for the actions of an obviously deranged person, why not use those resources to help these people instead of leaving them to stew in their insanity until they snap?

Nearly? Is that why infrastructure throughout the South was utterly destroyed, while the North's industry was still booming?

Yeah, the South "nearly" won...that's laughable to say the least.

Even then, my point still stands. It's happened before, no reason why it shouldn't happen again. You'd think that with his push on healthcare that Obama would look into making mental healthcare a more sought-after solution. Instead of banning guns and making the sane, law-abiding citizen take punishment for the actions of an obviously deranged person, why not use those resources to help these people instead of leaving them to stew in their insanity until they snap?

Oh look, another poster that doesn't realize that the overwhelming majority support an assault rifles ban.

[Sealed Shut]

Yeah, that's why you have sources for your claims.

FYI: Saying "prove me wrong" is a fallacy, and not a valid argument. Thanks for proving me right.

do i need to speak slower for you? what 'claim' do you want a source for

[Dragonix80]

I stated this on page 60:



As i expected, neither Rukentuts OR Aleros commented on it after both of them insisted i explain the purpose of the second amendment. This does not surprise me actually.
It's a common misunderstanding on the reason behind the second amendment. When you understand it's purpose, most arguments against it are null. So people who want more gun control just simply ignore its true purpose and steer the conversation away from it.
So here we are, 35+ pages later and they still argue on, argue based on false understanding, or perhaps they don't even care the true reason why the founding fathers wrote it.

Well spoken. You hit them in the heads.

[GreatOak]

It was the other way. Check out the southern strategy.

I think hes talking about classical liberalism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU-8Uz_nMaQ

---------- Post added 2012-12-19 at 03:15 PM ----------

I could not have said it better Chasey. Amazing how people are equating banning of semi-auto, high capacity weapons to taking away EVERY weapon. Also this crap if we don't have weapons our government will overrun us. Like you said in some crazy scenerio where Obama goes on tv and claims he is and has always been a Muslim and now the United States is a Muslim country (you know...a right wing nuts wet dream). So you are basically saying Obama is going to have control of our military and if that is the case like Chasey said they will roll over us. The other likely scenerio is our military, police, and most politicians on that hand will not go for it. Sorry militia nuts but we have had a peaceful government since 1865's. I guess for alot of you that is recent history.

You want to take away non-automatic guns from millions of good people. Are you surprised that they are angry?

[Chasey]

Even then, my point still stands. It's happened before, no reason why it shouldn't happen again. You'd think that with his push on healthcare that Obama would look into making mental healthcare a more sought-after solution. Instead of banning guns and making the sane, law-abiding citizen take punishment for the actions of an obviously deranged person, why not use those resources to help these people instead of leaving them to stew in their insanity until they snap?

Why would it happen again? Because the GOP has their ass chapped for a President with a D after his name pushing thru a healthcare proposal that was written and worked on by Reagan's cabinet and implemented successfully by a Republican governor in mass. under a different name. Seems to me the only thing the Republicans don't like Obamacare is Obama in the name of it. Um...isn't it the Republicans who have constantly chopped the mental health care in our country year after year? Currently you can get help in 1 of 2 ways for a mental health issue in our nation - be arrested or go to the hospital. This misfit did neither. So lets continue down the path of continue to arm people with guns that are made to KILL FAST without skill. Hell, why would we want regulations on them kind of guns? Hell make it the old west. That went well...
Now I hear the smarter base of the GOP wanting to arm the same UNION THUGS teachers who are so wiling to bash any time they get a chance.

So who is coming for your guns?

---------- Post added 2012-12-19 at 03:19 PM ----------

I think hes talking about classical liberalism

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU-8Uz_nMaQ

---------- Post added 2012-12-19 at 03:15 PM ----------



You want to take away non-automatic guns from millions of good people. Are you surprised that they are angry?

What is there to be angry about? No one is coming for your weapons.

Thats a pretty good video btw!

[Kasierith]

Well spoken. You hit them in the heads.

Don't make a post just to circle jerk. His interpretation of the 2nd amendment is outdated by the virtue of the fact that 1) one of the original purposes of the 2nd amendment was to prevent the need for a standing army, which is inherently dangerous to the safety of the people. The 2nd amendment failed years upon years ago, and at this point in time such a purpose is meaningless because the federal army is infinitely more powerful than small arms, by virtue of weapons that the founding fathers had no comprehension of. 2) The founding fathers who put in the 2nd amendment were the ones who wanted to see the states maintain control with a weak federal government in the background. The American Civil War disrupted this balance, and now the balance doesn't even exist because the federal government is already fully established. The world is dramatically different from that of the founding fathers, and ultimately their original reasoning barely applies because they were referring to a fledgling federal government with the militia supporting a strong yet divided state system, which is obviously not the case.

tyranny... oppression... communism.. dictatorship... these are words to describe what you are looking for. just because YOU might throw your hands up without a care, doesn't mean many of us are like you and willing to do the same.

Am I stuck in a time bubble? Is this the 1940's? If so, thank god I didn't go into Hollywood because when Mcarthyism hits there, it's going to get messy.

Just because you disagree with the majority of America (which will be the case if such a ban goes into effect, as is defined by the constitution), and this decision was based on the potential danger that a certain family of weapons bears, does not mean that everyone else is a dictator and a despot.

[Moadar]

I thought it was funny when I said take violent media away and the excuse was "lots of people are exposed to violent media and they don't hurt anyone.". They don't make the connection that a lot of people own assault style weapons and don't hurt anyone either.

They tout some European anti gun laws as whats needed here while skimping over most of them having anti violent media ones as well.

---------- Post added 2012-12-19 at 03:25 PM ----------

Anyone else think this is weird?

What the hell?

[GreatOak]

What is there to be angry about? No one is coming for your weapons.

Thats a pretty good video btw!

Most gun owners buy multiple guns, and taking that option away is nearly the same thing. Besides, "Assault Weapons" Kill less people than bare fists every year. Nearly all gun crimes are done with handguns.

[Deleted]

you obviously feel that the military would turn on the citizens at the command of the POTUS. this is simply NOT the case. if you were informed at all about the military you would know why. That is how i came to the conclusion.

never heard anyone use the word bananas like you did. so unless you clarify what you mean, it's a dead horse.

????
I "obviously" feel what now?!
How did you come up with that man?

Your vision of a civil war (the scenario you depicted) is so naive it makes me smile.

[Chasey]

I own multiple guns. Regulation of guns that are made to kill humans and very little other purpose is not a right it is selfish and basically only an option because the person wants it that way. Bare fists didn't kill 20 6 year olds. A .223 fired by a kid who had trouble holding a conversation with another human did! If you don't see wrong in that I'm not sure what to say. He can fire that many shots but is to trouble to converse says all you need to know about the weapon he used.

So really again, no one needs a gun that the military uses to kill.

Looking at the comments and other videos of that Sandy hook video you showed tells me there are many more gun crazies than anyone wants to believe. I mean really people think that this is being faked or staged to take away weapons....OK

[Kamatayan]

I oppose the ban as a gun owner.Currently own the following guns 3 shotguns,.40 cal Handgun and a AR-15.The issue here is not guns but mental health which the Dems seem to care less about and just want to strip more rights from Americans.

[GreatOak]

I own multiple guns. Regulation of guns that are made to kill humans and very little other purpose is not a right it is selfish and basically only an option because the person wants it that way. Bare fists didn't kill 20 6 year olds. A .223 fired by a kid who had trouble holding a conversation with another human did!

So really again, no one needs a gun that the military uses to kill.

Looking at the comments and other videos of that Sandy hook video you showed tells me there are many more gun crazies than anyone wants to believe. I mean really people think that this is being faked or staged to take away weapons....OK

The military uses "Assault Weapons" like those used in the mass murders? Tell me more. Fully Automatic Assault Rifles are nearly impossible for the average person to get.

This thread is full of people who have no clue what they are trying to ban. Yeah! Lets ban large magazines! Oh wait, people can make them at home easily? They can reload them since nobody else has a gun in all of these places?

Well, we can ban Assault Weapons! Wait, you mean its the same as any other semi automatic hunting rifle? Well, darn

We need:
1. Mandatory Background Checks
2. Getting rid of private loopholes
3. Mandatory Training
4. Mandatory locks when children are home

That all

[Deleted]

Most gun owners buy multiple guns, and taking that option away is nearly the same thing. Besides, "Assault Weapons" Kill less people than bare fists every year. Nearly all gun crimes are done with handguns.

Eeeeh no it's not NEARLY the same thing.
Good try though.
And I loved your fanta-statistic at the end.
It almost sounded true.

[Moadar]

I own multiple guns. Regulation of guns that are made to kill humans and very little other purpose is not a right it is selfish and basically only an option because the person wants it that way. Bare fists didn't kill 20 6 year olds. A .223 fired by a kid who had trouble holding a conversation with another human did! If you don't see wrong in that I'm not sure what to say. He can fire that many shots but is to trouble to converse says all you need to know about the weapon he used.

Ya he was impressionable recluse with no life outside violent media and no friends outside 4chan. I think I see what we really need to be targeting.

[Chasey]

I oppose the ban as a gun owner.Currently own the following guns 3 shotguns,.40 cal Handgun and a AR-15.The issue here is not guns but mental health which the Dems seem to care less about and just want to strip more rights from Americans.

Do you really think it is about stripping rights away? Specially when the republicants have fought so hard to shut the mental health facilities down. I'm sad for you.

[Kasierith]

I oppose the ban as a gun owner.Currently own the following guns 3 shotguns,.40 cal Handgun and a AR-15.The issue here is not guns but mental health which the Dems seem to care less about and just want to strip more rights from Americans.

So I imagine the concept that the Republicans are also entering discussion about gun laws, including the assault weapons ban, on multiple levels is just fine because the instituters of the Patriot Act would never do anything to harm your little freedoms.

[Chasey]

The military uses "Assault Weapons" like those used in the mass murders? Tell me more. Fully Automatic Assault Rifles are nearly impossible for the average person to get.

This thread is full of people who have no clue what they are trying to ban. Yeah! Lets ban large magazines! Oh wait, people can make them at home easily? They can reload them since nobody else has a gun in all of these places?

Well, we can ban Assault Weapons! Wait, you mean its the same as any other semi automatic hunting rifle? Well, darn

We need:
1. Mandatory Background Checks
2. Getting rid of private loopholes
3. Mandatory Training
4. Mandatory locks when children are home

That all

I agree with your 4 things you put up. I think more can be done. What I don't know. But that .223 he had didn't walk in there on its own. Last I checked deer hunting with a .223 is not really practical. If a person makes a "large" magizine and gets caught, he has special trouble coming his way. That is why it would be against the law. But seeing as SO many of YOU think they are coming after your guns it would be stupid to try and do that right? The fact you think a semi-auto hunting rifle and a AR-15, .223 or AK 74 are the same thing maybe puts you in the same class as all those other clueless people around here. Just sayin'