|
KaptainKrunk posted:If two Muslims, one a non-citizen, purchasing thousands of rounds of ammunition and assault weapons legally in the wake of similar terror attacks in Paris isn't enough to motivate conservatives to maybe, kinda, possibly consider gun control nothing will. The arms industry and the NRA have over half of our politicians by the balls and nothing will change for the foreseeable future. Yeah you're right. let's gun control muslims so this doesn't happen again, might aswell do the jews next and then the rest of the non races there hitler. You do realize that gun control affects the poor way more than it affects the rich right? Oh poo poo they legally bought the guns! This is such a moot point, you can legally buy all the parts needed to build a firearm except the lower reciever and mill one out yourself. It takes less than 10 minutes if you have a basic youtube knowledge of how to use a dremel. People love to use gun control as the way to stop crime but they really don't know what that means. I could go carve a lower receiver out of a piece of wood, so are you going to start monitoring what every single person buys in the entire country to stop them from building guns? Are we going to censor the information on how to construct firearms too? Because there are gunsmiths out there. So what's next then, with the advent of 3d Printers you can print barrels. So you can print every single piece of a rifle. Are we now going to start observing inside your house to ensure you aren't building one yourself?
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 06:43 |
|
|
Couldn't you make the same picture except replace the guns with Muslims and "assault weapon" with "terrorist" and make an equally (or more, even) compelling argument that would go against the tenets of most who agree with your picture?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Yeah you're right. let's gun control muslims so this doesn't happen again, might aswell do the jews next and then the rest of the non races there hitler. I never advocated for targeting any particular group. Of course, yeah you can go through the effort of loving making a gun if you really wanted, but the amount of effort needed to do so is more than most people are willing to put forth. You're really grasping for straws here. Gun control works and is entirely consistent with a reasonable reading of the Second Amendment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
mastajake posted:Couldn't you make the same picture except replace the guns with Muslims and "assault weapon" with "terrorist" and make an equally (or more, even) compelling argument that would go against the tenets of most who agree with your picture? Umm I don't think so, but you are welcome to try.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Yeah you're right. let's gun control muslims so this doesn't happen again, might aswell do the jews next and then the rest of the non races there hitler. Man if only statistics and evidence actually backed these claims. And no, most people are not going have a Metal 3D printer, and 3D printing a plastic barrel is a terrible idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
KaptainKrunk posted:I never advocated for targeting any particular group. You sure? Step 1. Let's start with our rifle kit 18+ signature is only thing required delivered to your door http://palmettostatearmory.com/catalog/product/view/id/2279/ Step 1a. Add to cart Ammo and Magazines Step 2. Buy lower receiver http://www.80percentarms.com/collections/lower-receivers/products/80-lower-receiver-type-iii-hard-anodized-billet-ar-15 Step 2a. buy dremel if you don't have one Step 3. watch this video drill 2 holes and a square next to a rectangle https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooDe2Ovkh8I Step 4. Use firearm So tell me, This is the legal firearm route Step 1 Buy firearm wait X days by state law, (Or walk out the door with it) Step 2 buy ammo and magazines Step 3. Use firearm If you really truly think that a criminal wouldn't do these extra few steps and extra hour worth of effort to commit a crime you really should rethink reality. Especially if they are an extremist willing to lose their own life while killing others. WAR CRIME GIGOLO fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:B looks straight off the short bus but dunno about "scary looking". If all guns except Klobbs were banned, gun deaths would decline rapidly, because you have to stand there and take it for a few minutes to get shot enough to die.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
i too like to cite a bunch of people who were mad about not owning slaves as my gently caress THE MAN role models
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:So what's next then, with the advent of 3d Printers which are prohibitively expensive for most people to get access to
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
clammy posted:I feel like if guns were banned, then the people who go into dark crazy places in their brains and instead of coming out of that thinking "wow, I was in a crazy headspace, glad I feel better now," instead of that they come out thinking, "yeah, gently caress these assholes, and i'm going to martyr myself to prove a point to the world because for some reason i feel like have nothing left to lose," those people, even if they couldn't for the life of them get it together to get their hands on a firearm, they would just figure out how to make a homemade bomb (it's not hard) and kill a bunch of people that way. Or they would go on a stabbing rampage.Or they would just kamikaze an automobile into a big group of people. My point is, the problem isn't guns, it's people running amok. But since we can't figure out how to stop people from running amok, we figure we need to keep them from getting weapons. But since everything can be a weapon then that's kind of a dumb superficial solution to say that suppressing one specific weapon in a sea of potential weapons is going to be some kind of solution. People run amok in America because they are disenfranchised and completely hosed. Guns make violence easier and deadlier. Not every gun murder is committed by someone ready, willing and able to kill their target by any other means.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
3d printers are extremely overhyped, in general, but also specifically as a means for gun fanboys as a way to circumvent gun laws. The ability to make homemade firearms has existed literally for centuries in every country with strong gun control. Nevertheless without mass production and legal markets they exist at vastly lower rates.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:Guns make violence easier and deadlier. Not every gun murder is committed by someone ready, willing and able to kill their target by any other means. Violence is pretty good though. Might as well make it a poor pastime. Besides, if you have a gun you'll be better able to deal with Tezzor's posting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
The answer is B & C because they're an assault on good taste.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Mmann posted:The answer is B & C because they're an assault on good taste. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
Mmann posted:The answer is B & C because they're an assault on good taste. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:The way some people talk about gun control you'd think guns were totally illegal and very rare in the US until about a week or so before the Columbine shootings, and since then we've been manufacturing the things on a wartime footing and leaving them in piles outside of mental health clinics and elementary schools. Your basic premise is flawed. First of all, mass shootings didn't begin with Columbine. The term "going postal" originated from a number of mass shootings in the 80s and 90s that involved postal workers in some way, for instance. It wasn't the first school shooting, either - the 1966 University of Texas massacre and the 1974 Olean High School shooting are prominent examples, though there were a number of other such incidents throughout the second half of the 20th century. Second, gun control is changing constantly. There have been a number of federal gun bills passed since 1980, though with no clear trend or direction to the list - it's an imcoherent mishmash of pro-gun control and anti-gun control measures. On top of that, some states have their own extra gun laws on top of federal law. Third, your assertion that those mean old lefties just want to ban all guns forever out of a vindictive and self-destructive compulsion to gently caress over conservative voters is downright stupid. Is that really more reasonable than "they want to put in place restrictions on dangerous weapons to reduce the possibility that they are used for violence"? I guess it's not entirely unbelievable that you'd think that, considering that your solution to gun violence is to just end all violence so there won't be any violence left to use those perfectly innocent guns for. Nonsense posted:There is no reasonable gun control for those folks, if you haven't already noticed. The machinegun list thing is brought up like it was a slave rebellion, and they dared to trick the gun masters. Hey, they say the same thing about taxes, but they still pay 'em every year. Most people crazy enough to actually start an armed rebellion over gun control (as opposed to toothless blather and bluffing hyperbole) are already involved in insane anti-government militia poo poo like the Oath Keepers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The term "going postal" originated from a number of mass shootings in the 80s and 90s that involved postal workers in some way, for instance. for the record, "in some way" usually boils down to "management was being so loving awful and treating people so badly that they came to work specifically to shoot their boss" the second one, the one that really got people's attention, where the guy came to work specifically to shoot a couple of the managers and nobody else, has a bunch of news footage of the guy's coworkers and every single one of them says some variation on "i don't want to speak ill of the dead, and i'm not saying he deserved it, but we all knew someone was gonna shoot that rear end in a top hat in the face one day". that guy had been given the shittiest job (being a carrier who works a different route every day) and was getting disciplined over all kinds of bullshit, a lot of it manufactured, because they were trying to get him fired because his numbers weren't at literally machine-perfect level.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Third, your assertion that those mean old lefties just want to ban all guns forever out of a vindictive and self-destructive compulsion to gently caress over conservative voters is downright stupid. Is that really more reasonable than "they want to put in place restrictions on dangerous weapons to reduce the possibility that they are used for violence"? I guess it's not entirely unbelievable that you'd think that, considering that your solution to gun violence is to just end all violence so there won't be any violence left to use those perfectly innocent guns for. Conservatism on any issue generally requires some kind of paranoid thinking that someone is out to get you, so yeah it's entirely expected that people would think Australia's gun ban was a liberal plot to make gun owners cry and not an extremely successful public safety initiative that has effectively ended mass shootings in that country. To be fair to Killroy he said in the other thread he votes Democrat anyway, so at least the usual criticism that pro-gun people talk about mental health and education and poverty after every massacre but then go vote against it anyway doesn't apply. But your criticism that ending gun violence by making 100% sure that no one wants to hurt anyone else ever is unicorn-and-fairydust impossible horseshit rather than emulating the successful gun control policies of other countries is perfectly on point. Also lol at him thinking mass shootings and gun violence didn't happen before Columbine. There's a reason we passed the NFA in one of the fleeting decades of sanity America ever had when reacting to gun violence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:First of all, mass shootings didn't begin with Columbine... quote:Second, gun control is changing constantly. There have been a number of federal gun bills passed since 1980, though with no clear trend or direction to the list - it's an imcoherent mishmash of pro-gun control and anti-gun control measures. quote:Third, your assertion that those mean old lefties just want to ban all guns forever out of a vindictive and self-destructive compulsion to gently caress over conservative voters is downright stupid. Is that really more reasonable than "they want to put in place restrictions on dangerous weapons to reduce the possibility that they are used for violence"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Also lol at him thinking mass shootings and gun violence didn't happen before Columbine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:13
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Are mass shootings on the rise, or aren't they? If they are, then my premise seems sound. Gun sales have been on the rise over the last 20 years too. We don't have gun registration so we don't know how many are sold in a year but they tend to correlate with the number of background checks  And we know that gun deaths correlate with the rates of gun ownership.  So I think you've got a bit more to do to establish that the number of guns is unrelated to the number of mass shootings beyond "well we have more mass shootings and guns have existed since before the Revolutionary War so they can't be related" E: updated graph VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
And it didn't do a drat thing. quote:A 2004 critical review of firearms research by a National Research Council committee said that an academic study of the assault weapon ban "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes." The committee noted that the study's authors said the guns were used criminally with relative rarity before the ban and that its maximum potential effect on gun violence outcomes would be very small.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
Edit: Changed the graph
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So I think you've got a bit more to do to establish that the number of guns is unrelated to the number of mass shootings beyond "well we have more mass shootings and guns have existed since before the Revolutionary War so they can't be related" That said, I hadn't considered that people were buying guns at substantially higher rates than before, even in the absence of substantial legislative changes. I will give that some thought, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
In tonight's speech Obama said we should not let people on the no-fly list buy guns and that it should be more difficult to purchase an assault rifle. 2 of my Facebook friends have already had meltdowns about how "the President called tonight for banning guns." This is what gun control advocates are up against. Let's not let terrorism suspects buy guns and make it more difficult to buy an assault rifle than walking into a loving Wal-mart = HERE THEY COME TO GET EM MOLON LABE THEN YOU GOVERNMENT BASTARDS. Let's see if there's any response on either of them to my request for a quote or a link to part of the speech calling for a gun ban. I have a feeling that by tomorrow morning I, a gun-loving psychopath who owns more than a dozen firearms, will be confirmed as a lefty gun-grabber who wants us all to die disarmed and starving in a FEMA death camp. I say again, it's not liberal vs. conservative anymore, it's people who inhabit three-dimensional physical reality vs. people who inhabit a world constructed entirely of terrified paranoid delusions. And hoo boy does that ever suck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Oh gently caress off. I didn't say that and you know it. Yeah okay I was being unfair, sorry. MrTuffPaws posted:And it didn't do a drat thing. The assault weapons ban is not the NFA E: JonathonSpectre posted:In tonight's speech Obama said we should not let people on the no-fly list buy guns and that it should be more difficult to purchase an assault rifle. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:
Those people are the reason for you to own guns. They're certainly among the reasons I do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
Didn't the democrats (and anybody else who had any sense) hate the No-fly list since its stupid since nobody on it has actually committed a crime but because they were non-white or pissed off some racist DHS employee they can't fly? Speaking of DHS employees: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/72-dhs-employees-on-terrorist-watch-list/ Why the gently caress are we now saying its ok to take away a constitutional right just because they have a scary name like Mohammad? This about face on it is disappointing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yeah okay I was being unfair, sorry. There needs to be due process on both, especially the ability to challenge a designation in court, but not letting potential terrorists fly or buy guns seems reasonable imo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
Shall not be infringed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Shall not be infringed. Yeah well tell that to all the felons, and vets who pull a psych discharge
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:51
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Shall not be infringed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller VVVVV Nice VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Shall not be infringed. Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press What part of "no law" don't you understand?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:And we know that gun deaths correlate with the rates of gun ownership.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Admiral Bosch posted:Those people are the reason for you to own guns. They're certainly among the reasons I do. No, they're the reason for the police to have guns. Preferably as special equipment to be called for as reinforcements, rather than day-to-day regular equipment. If an armed militia decides to hold me hostage for some reason I'm under no silly illusions about singlehandedly killing them all in a Wild West shootout if only I had a gun. Numlock posted:Didn't the democrats (and anybody else who had any sense) hate the No-fly list since its stupid since nobody on it has actually committed a crime but because they were non-white or pissed off some racist DHS employee they can't fly? You think the about-face has only just happened now? Why do you think the no-fly list even still exists? The no-fly list was hated when Bush did it, but like most of Bush's other excesses, the no-fly list was abruptly forgotten by left-leaning media as soon as Obama kept it around and continued to use it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
Admiral Bosch posted:Those people are the reason for you to own guns. They're certainly among the reasons I do. You are not John Woo/Agent 47/Neo and just having a concealed carry is not a surefire protection, in fact you'd more likely freeze up unless you've actually experienced a combat situation and have drilled how to react. Range time doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
Numlock posted:Didn't the democrats (and anybody else who had any sense) hate the No-fly list since its stupid since nobody on it has actually committed a crime but because they were non-white or pissed off some racist DHS employee they can't fly? Kilroy posted:Basically, since their enemies loving hate it, it must be a great idea.  , and you can see this in the USPOL thread as well. Meanwhile idiots on the right who supported it before, are now scratching their heads.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You are not John Woo/Agent 47/Neo and just having a concealed carry is not a surefire protection, in fact you'd more likely freeze up unless you've actually experienced a combat situation and have drilled how to react. Range time doesn't count. More projecting from the anti-gun side, what a surprise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
Numlock posted:More projecting from the anti-gun side, what a surprise. Its okay, your fantasy of being the good guy with a gun is still secure, I assure you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 06:43 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You are not John Woo/Agent 47/Neo and just having a concealed carry is not a surefire protection, in fact you'd more likely freeze up unless you've actually experienced a combat situation and have drilled how to react. Range time doesn't count. Sometimes, I guess. You're laying out the worst scenario, just like people with concealed carry fantasies lay out the best one. It is possible to use a gun to defend yourself. It happens from time to time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 15:00
|
|