|
Gripweed posted:I'm serious, the current existing gun control options are not satisfactory. On the one hand you got the Dems who want to do terrible, dumb, ineffective laws like the AWB or not letting people on the do not fly list buy guns. And on the other hand you got the gun fans who, if they're willing to even suggest anything at all, say we should just fix all societal problems and end unhappiness. like i always say - if they won't give a inch we'll take a mile.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 13:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
Just a note the Virginia Tech shooter used all 10 round magazines. Anyone with a small amount of practice can become very proficient in quickly changing magazines. For the pro gun control side. Would you rather pass law that reduces gun deaths by 25% or mass shootings by 25%. I see the attempt to do the latter as impediment to doing the former as a result of the way guns are a subject of the culture war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
Hello from the UK. We had a school shooting before it was cool and banned handguns in response and it was great? We gave folks a chance to hand in their stuff in an amnesty and that was that. In the 20 years since, we've had 1 (one) mass shooting total and currently average around 20-30 firearm homicides a year. Also most of our cops aren't armed, which is also great. Basically folks I'm here today saying that a gun-free society owns bones and you too could live in this wonderful world.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
So the california bar shooter was crazy,possibly PTSD and also posted pro gun control stuff online. He posted on facebook during the last mass shooting "thoughts and prayers aren't enough" etc etc. Guess this was him trying to make a point? He posted this on facebook just before the shooting "“I hope they call me insane,” he wrote. “Yeah … I’m insane, but the only thing you people do after these shootings is ‘hopes and prayers’ … and wonder why these keep happening…” He also posted on Instagram during the shooting saying he was not crazy, but bored. Yeah, because boredom typically leads to slaughtering a dozen people. vincentpricesboner fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Nov 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Just a note the Virginia Tech shooter used all 10 round magazines. Anyone with a small amount of practice can become very proficient in quickly changing magazines. That seems like a really weird hypothetical to pose when we could just ban guns and cut way down on both simultaneously. Like, if you want to cut down on gun deaths you ban handguns and if you want to cut down on mass shootings you ban semi-automatic rifles. Let's ban both!
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:Hello from the UK. We had a school shooting before it was cool and banned handguns in response and it was great? We gave folks a chance to hand in their stuff in an amnesty and that was that. In the 20 years since, we've had 1 (one) mass shooting total and currently average around 20-30 firearm homicides a year. Oh, how easy is it to emigrate to the UK? I thought Brexit made it a lot harder.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:That seems like a really weird hypothetical to pose when we could just ban guns and cut way down on both simultaneously. Don't know how to tell you this friend but neither of those things is going to happen. It's not a hypothetical because there are real gun control policies us pro gun folks could support but this threads theory of change is accelerationism so arguing for incremental improvements and hence saving lives isn't popular. A few easy examples: 1. Close the gun show loop hole, by opening the NICS check process to all Americans, not just FFLs. This would mean all gun sales go through a federal background check, while allowing all Americans to sell each other guns freely. 2.Move semiautomatic rifles to the NFA AoW list, but modernize the NFA to enable all NFA applications to be processed in a timely manner I.E. 2-4 weeks. This would move the scary evil AR-15 to ornerous system of regulation, while modernizing that agency (BATFE) and it's processes to respond in a timely manner for things like short barrel rifles and suppressor tax stamp requests. 3 Ban bump stocks and other similar devices ( how many of you know about binary triggers, pew pew), but reopen the NFA for new automatic weapons to be registered. Automatic weapons are legally defined as 1 trigger pull fires multiple bullets. Overall rate of fire is not addressed in the law hence why these devices don't make a semi-automatoc weapon into an automatic one. Since overall rate of fire seems to be a concern this would do so while opening up the ability for collectors and hobbiests to have new automatic weapons, I'm sure you are all aware that legally owned automatic weapons are never used in crimes because the kind of person who goes to the effort to acquire one aren't violent criminals. 4 Add any domestic violence related investigation/arrest/charges to the disqualifiers for the purchase of a hand gun (with avenue for appeal of course). In exchange pass national conceal carry reciprocity with minimum federal standards for training etc. Domestic violence is the #1 predictor for using a gun to murder someone. So if we want to reduce the harm caused by guns we need to take this into account. Likewise conceal carry owners are much less likely to commit crimes and thier rights should be expanded. Each of these would reduce harm and be the type of political trade that could get support from gun owners. Or keep trying to take our rights away while giving bus nothing in return, and hence giving us every reason to oppose the change.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:44
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Or keep trying to take our rights away while giving bus nothing in return, and hence giving us every reason to oppose the change. There's nothing we have left to give you. You have everything you could ever want. Gun rights are more enshrined in American law that at any point in history in any country ever. You have won, completely and utterly. This is the world you won.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
Felony DV convictions bar you from possessing guns per the 68 Gun control act. Misdemeanors bar you under the lautenburg amendment to the same.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
Not sure if this is the right place but is there any actual historical basis for a group of armed civilians successfully beating their own government after the 1900s? If we look at things like Tienanmen Square, The War in Syria and Dozen of conflicts in Africa they always lose. Am I missing something here?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:58
|
|
|
I mean, jesus chirst, look at your demandsKingFisher posted:4 Add any domestic violence related investigation/arrest/charges to the disqualifiers for the purchase of a hand gun (with avenue for appeal of course). In exchange pass national conceal carry reciprocity with minimum federal standards for training etc. You think it would be OK to prevent domestic abusers from buying any more hand guns. No that they would have to give up the guns they own, and not that they would be prevented from buying guns of any type, just hand guns(maybe). But for that tiny, minuscule concession to humanity to be acceptable to you, it must be bundled with a national law that makes the paperwork for travelling across state lines with a concealed carry easier. That is absurd. More than that, it's monstrous. If that is the kind of compromise that is acceptable to you, then there's no point in trying to compromise with you. A support group for survivors of a mass shooting were just the victims of a second random mass shooting. It's a sick joke, but it's reality in America now. And before anything can be done to address it, you demand that it be guaranteed that you won't have to get another concealed carry license if you move to another state. On some level you have to understand how unreasonable that is. On some level you must feel gross making a demand like that, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I mean, jesus chirst, look at your demands Depending on the state, those charged with assault already have to give up their weapons. I don't see the big deal with not letting people who beat the poo poo out of their significant others having a weapon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:You think it would be OK to prevent domestic abusers from buying any more hand guns. No that they would have to give up the guns they own, and not that they would be prevented from buying guns of any type, just hand guns(maybe). This is already covered by existing laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Violence_Offender_Gun_Ban posted:The act bans shipment, transport, possession, ownership, and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, or who are under a restraining (protection) order for domestic abuse that falls within the criteria set by 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8). The 1968 Gun Control Act and subsequent amendments had previously prohibited anyone convicted of a felony and anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order from possessing a firearm. The act also makes it unlawful to knowingly sell or give a firearm or ammunition to such persons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:This is already covered by existing laws. Fantastic! That's a genuinely good law and I'm glad it's in place. I'm also very pleased that, somehow, congress managed to pass it without a concession reducing the amount of paperwork Kingfisher would have to do if he moved to a different state
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:This is already covered by existing laws. Thanks for clarifying, my understanding is that a pattern domestic violence is the factor which is most predictive of using a gun to commit homicide. As long as that continues to be true that is evidence that the laws keeping guns out of the hands of domestic abusers are insufficient. For example if a person goes to the RR and the doctor suspects domestic violence then perhaps an automatic arms removal and purchase block should be put in place for that residence and any occupants. Feel free to propose laws which would address this or other specific gun death use cases for example old white guys commiting suicide or high rate of shootings in some large cities. I'll be happy to give you the cost in terms of political trade required for the pro gun side to sign off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:I'll be happy to give you the cost in terms of political trade required for the pro gun side to sign off. You're disgusting Gripweed posted:A support group for survivors of a mass shooting were just the victims of a second random mass shooting. It's a sick joke, but it's reality in America now. And before anything can be done to address it, you demand that it be guaranteed that you won't have to get another concealed carry license if you move to another state. On some level you have to understand how unreasonable that is. On some level you must feel gross making a demand like that, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Not sure if this is the right place but is there any actual historical basis for a group of armed civilians successfully beating their own government after the 1900s? the argument that the second amendment is there so the people can overthrow the government makes little sense as a country's governing document wouldn't have such a right outlined. https://twitter.com/RawStory/status/1062003066675908609 KingFisher posted:I'll be happy to give you the cost in terms of political trade required for the pro gun side to sign off. gently caress em. they wouldn't sign off on even the slightest and almost universally popular provisions, we're taking it all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
It's irrelevant anyway, the NRA will never support any law restricting killers from buying guns no matter what the tradeoff because that's just leaving profit on the table.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:Thanks for clarifying, my understanding is that a pattern domestic violence is the factor which is most predictive of using a gun to commit homicide. https://www.statista.com/statistics/476461/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-legality-of-shooters-weapons/ 1) most mass shootings(this includes school shootings too) are committed with legal weapons, no poo poo the laws are insufficient 2&3)the NRA, noted for respecting doctors and science too https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1060256567914909702 the NRA IS SO RESPECTFUL OF SCIENCE, that they killed off gun death research in 1996 https://www.ucsusa.org/suppressing-research-effects-gun-violence 4) laws like this one? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-signs-bill-revoking-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221 kinda anemic of you to be suggesting things which will never happen with the orange-fluff topped idiot in the white house. how about instead, you stop being so contemptible as to defend your little murdertoys over human lives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
Is anyone annoyed at these feel good but let’s not actually do anything articles or am I being too critical? Family of youngest bar massacre victim: "It's not about gun control"
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Is anyone annoyed at these feel good but let’s not actually do anything articles or am I being too critical? It's not surprise that people who have been conditioned for generations to think of "politics" as something disgusting and to be avoided can't bring themselves to confront that a political problem killed their family members. Also: KingFisher posted:Or keep trying to take our rights away while giving bus nothing in return, and hence giving us every reason to oppose the change. You have posted this tripe in two different threads and it's absolutely despicable, as are you. There is no right to gun ownership other than on paper. gently caress your gun rights. Melt every gun down and use them to build a giant statue of a penis that says "gently caress your gun rights." (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:There is no right to gun ownership other than on paper. gently caress your gun rights. Melt every gun down and use them to build a giant statue of a penis that says "gently caress your gun rights."
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
twodot posted:What's the point in posting this? If you're right, then good job you win, no posting necessary, all American guns are immediately melted down. If you're wrong, you're just adding nonsense white noise into the conversation. In either scenario, what do you imagine this post is adding to the conversation? The basis of his argument is built around  "I have the right to bear arms and you have to offer me things so that I might decide to let you lower the number of blood sacrifices to the altar of my lovely hobby every year," as if the right to bear arms is this necessary human right and not an accident of American history that should be recognized as a mistake. He's being an rear end in a top hat about it. There's no point in going through his lovely list line by line because everything he wants is outrageous, and he's poo poo up multiple threads with the same thing now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:09
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The basis of his argument is built around edit: If you posted "You are a jackass and here is your new mod challenge." I could have some respect for that. Posting "Here is my nonsense fantasy that will definitely never happen" is just trash. Have better standards. twodot fucked around with this message at 08:15 on Nov 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:12
|
|
|
twodot posted:Ok that guy is an rear end in a top hat/idiot, sure. Do you have a plan for literally melting down every gun into a giant statue of a penis, or are you also just an rear end in a top hat/idiot? I mean no because it wasn't a serious suggestion (well, I'm serious that we should ban guns, not that we should make a giant penis statue), but then, nothing he's suggesting deserves a serious response because it's not a good faith argument.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I mean no because it wasn't a serious suggestion (well, I'm serious that we should ban guns, not that we should make a giant penis statue), but then, nothing he's suggesting deserves a serious response because it's not a good faith argument.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:17
|
|
|
twodot posted:I realize I'm getting meta here, but your actual position is that mods the should respond to bad faith arguments with additional bad faith arguments? If so just perma-ban me now. I don't really think "go gently caress yourself, you're an rear end in a top hat" is an inappropriate response to what is obviously a ridiculous argument to present, but if you want to PM me about it, you can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:19
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I don't really think "go gently caress yourself, you're an rear end in a top hat" is an inappropriate response to what is obviously a ridiculous argument to present, but if you want to PM me about it, you can. twodot fucked around with this message at 08:53 on Nov 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 08:21
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The basis of his argument is built around You're correct, there is no inherent human right to self defense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:You're correct, there is no inherent human right to self defense. Nope! There is an inherent human right to life though, which is currently incompatible with the second amendment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 15:38
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:You're correct, there is no inherent human right to self defense. Disagreed, I need access to a smallpox spray to defend myself. We should ban guns, smallpox won't penetrate nearby houses the way high powered rifle rounds would. Really though, you have a right to self defense, but how far does that extend? Is it relative to commonly available weaponry? If so, we might have to start seizing guns after all. 
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Nov 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:You're correct, there is no inherent human right to self defense. I was going to type a response here but I'd rather just laugh at a great example of how hilariously far gun people will strawman gun control. Edit: Because of the shitposting rule, and this might qualify: What I'm saying here is SimonCat has reacted to strict gun control as if it's an attack on the basic ability to defend one's self when attacked, which it doesn't and that's a bizarre and extreme interpretation. It's a common tactic to massively over-react when gun legislation is proposed and interpret it that gun control advocates just want people to roll over and die in the presumably massive problem of attacks in the home that need guns. Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Nov 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
Anyone who advocates for any kind of gun control secretly wants all white Americans to be legally forced to lie down in a line on the highway while an MS-13 terrorist drives a road roller over them. I know I do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:Anyone who advocates for any kind of gun control secretly wants all white Americans to be legally forced to lie down in a line on the highway while an MS-13 terrorist drives a road roller over them. I know I do. This, but unironically and in reverse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
Reminder there are rather high penalties for shitposting in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:There's nothing we have left to give you. You have everything you could ever want. Gun rights are more enshrined in American law that at any point in history in any country ever. You have won, completely and utterly. This is the world you won. no i don't see a lot of private citizens toting * 40mm autocannons * RPGs * SAMs * tactical nukes so clearly america is an oppressive shithole that needs to second amendment harder (It really is odd how American second amendment boosters are very specifically obsessed about small arms, to the exclusion of anything else you'd need to assemble a well-regulated militia that won't get laughed out of the room by a real military) suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Nov 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 21:13
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
You can buy all of that except the nuke, and some of the tracking software and components that would make a missile shoot down a plane more effectively. The first two, obviously, are much easier to get. It's mostly just a time and money issue there. The small arm part of the equation is the thing that gets the most new legislation thrown at it, and it's the part the average person bitching about gun laws can actually loving afford. Not a lot of people willing to throw 80k at a WW2 tank to spruce it up and get it firing and the ammo to go with it. I am also profoundly grateful we haven't had some crazy with a trust fund decide to go that route, because holy poo poo would it be devastating if you just spruced up even some minor armored vehicle and just went for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
twodot posted:No, "go gently caress yourself, you're an rear end in a top hat" is a great PM to send to a poster. It's even a great thing to post in a thread to cool people off. It's also a great message to put in a probation or a perma-ban. Proposing absurd policies (edit or not desirable policies aka "in bad faith") in Debate and Discussion is a thing that should have consequences. gently caress off twodot (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
Mulva posted:You can buy all of that except the nuke, and some of the tracking software and components that would make a missile shoot down a plane more effectively. The first two, obviously, are much easier to get. It's mostly just a time and money issue there. The small arm part of the equation is the thing that gets the most new legislation thrown at it, and it's the part the average person bitching about gun laws can actually loving afford. Not a lot of people willing to throw 80k at a WW2 tank to spruce it up and get it firing and the ammo to go with it. They just hire the private guards/army to defend their billionaire compounds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
stop interviewing moronic parents that say it's not about guns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 00:42
|
|