The Guns thread

[NotFadeAway]

A man walks into a public place armed with a knife. He manages to kill what, a couple of people before he's subdued.

A man walks into a public place armed with an AR15. How many people do you think will die?

And a man with a CCW can put the knife wielding maniac down. I would. And a man with a gun can put down a home invader.

I'm willing to give the anti-gun group the watch list. That's it.

 

[The Endless]

And a man with a CCW can put the knife wielding maniac down. I would. And a man with a gun can put down a home invader.

I'm willing to give the anti-gun group the watch list. That's it.

But if the man can buy an assault rifle from Walmart... why would he just have a knife?

 

[NotFadeAway]

But if the man can buy an assault rifle from Walmart... why would he just have a knife?

Something snapped on a random day......maybe he was hungry and in need of money and/or food.

Murder and crime is a mental health-economic issue, not guns.

 

[DeadPresident]

Something snapped on a random day......maybe he was hungry and in need of money and/or food.

Murder and crime is a mental health-economic issue, not guns.

It's about mental health, economics and gun access. I don't know why people keep trying to construct a false dichotomy of causal factors. You've been so indoctrinated though that you can't even begin to look at this issue with any vague semblance of logic.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

It's about mental health, economics and gun access. I don't know why people keep trying to construct a false dichotomy of causal factors. You've been so indoctrinated though that you can't even begin to look at this issue with any vague semblance of logic.

You don't seem to be able to do so either.

 

[DeadPresident]

You don't seem to be able to do so either.

One of the only people doing so in this thread, actually

 

[NotFadeAway]

It's about mental health, economics and gun access. I don't know why people keep trying to construct a false dichotomy of causal factors. You've been so indoctrinated though that you can't even begin to look at this issue with any vague semblance of logic.

From my point of view, you and those like you who wish to take away access to guns are trying to take away one of the few means that average, everyday citizens have to protect themselves from injustices such as robbery, home invasions, rape, oppression via corrupt law enforcement/officials, etc and I will NEVER be on board with anything more than this watch list.

 

[DeadPresident]

From my point of view, you and those like you who wish to take away access to guns are trying to take away one of the few means that average, everyday citizens have to protect themselves from injustices such as robbery, home invasions, rape, oppression via corrupt law enforcement/officials, etc and I will NEVER be on board with anything more than this watch list.

This is a more measured response than the likes of what Webhead drums out with his knuckles, but it still makes a few assumptions. I'm not saying access to guns needs to be taken away across the board, it'd be damn near impossible anyways, there's almost a firearm per person in circulation stateside - even if the supply and sale of guns stopped tomorrow it wouldn't be making a whole lot of difference.

I understand it's a big part of America's social makeup and culture, I wouldn't advocate for gun access to be eliminated. What I'd discuss is some kind of compromise, I'd say a watch list is a good start, and then I'd probably opt for restriction of access to people who exhibit certain behavior as a preventative measure. If people have certain mental health conditions, or if they're on some organization's radar for activity related to any kind of sketchy interests it's probably best not to provide those people with free access to firearms. Reasonable folks with concerns around security like yourself and Webface shouldn't be affected by gun restrictions - but folks like Micah Johnson or Dylan Roof? People knew about their radical inclinations for some time, should they have been allowed access to gats? IMO if you're going to be advocating for extremist nonsense you forfeit your right to be considered a reasonable person who should be allowed to own a weapon.

I'm assuming you don't frequent white supremacy or radical Islamic websites and don't have a particular affinity for mass murder? Then you ain't the guy anyone in the public should be afraid of or who should be penalized by new legislation. I'm not advocating for some kind of blanket initiative around guns, but it would be asinine to suggest the US can't find some kind of compromise that doesn't hamper access for the reasonable folks while flagging and disarming people who could statistically pose a threat to others. If someone appears to be a reasonable adult they should be treated as such, if someone seems like they don't have the maturity to be trusted with a deadly weapon, maybe there should be things in place protect the decent citizens from those people.

 

[TheCommissioner]

From my point of view, you and those like you who wish to take away access to guns are trying to take away one of the few means that average, everyday citizens have to protect themselves from injustices such as robbery, home invasions, rape, oppression via corrupt law enforcement/officials, etc and I will NEVER be on board with anything more than this watch list.

and guns have stopped that how?

 

[Thundercrack85]

Something snapped on a random day......maybe he was hungry and in need of money and/or food.

Murder and crime is a mental health-economic issue, not guns.

And guns, especially semiautomatic guns, enable murders to easily kill many people in very little time. That is their primary function.

 

[TheCommissioner]

http://bust.com/living/16586-another-feminist-win-from-the-supreme-court.html#.V7DKlTaI6u4.twitter

Basically, the Court decided it was time to validate all the domestic violence that happens while the perpetrator is under the influence and otherwise in a volatile state that causes their actions to be executed recklessly. This is a win for feminism, equality in the home, and in finally making movements on reigning in this country’s insane, libertarian approach to gun-owning.

 

[regwec]

Beneath all the half-brained lefty guff in that article, it appears there lies some good news.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

This is not as big of a deal as it seems. This ruling clarified a small, vague part of the laws that differentiated between the different types of domestic violence and how far courts could go with stripping gun ownership from domestic abusers. This was always the intent of an earlier ruling but until someone brought a case in front of the Supreme Court, they couldn't rule further on it and clarify specifics.

 

[conan69]

I love how everyone brings up DC and Chicago to try and make some point that stricter gun laws don't work. Stricter gun laws only work when everyone is adhering to them. You can't say this little bubble here is hard to get guns because guess what happens then? You go outside the bubble and get your guns. It's the dumbest argument in the gun control debate.

We need common sense laws and then those laws to be enforced.

... like doing something about sanctuary cities? How many of these guys running the streets with illegal guns are illegal immigrants with records? Some statistics suggest as much as half.

But Libs dont want to hear about that. They unwilling to do anything about it. But then they ***** and moan about gun violence.

You want to do something about gun violence, its complicated and not just about restricting access to guns. Criminals will always find a way to get guns. The solution involves immigration, policing techniques, the economy, family, community participation, schooling, etc.

 

[chaseter]

Sanctuary cities are about the dumbest thing the left has come up with over the years.

 

[SV Fan]

I love how everyone brings up DC and Chicago to try and make some point that stricter gun laws don't work. Stricter gun laws only work when everyone is adhering to them. You can't say this little bubble here is hard to get guns because guess what happens then? You go outside the bubble and get your guns. It's the dumbest argument in the gun control debate.

Personally I hate the Chicago argument in the sense people use it as a reason why stricter gun laws don't work completely ignoring that if you go by a per capita rate of death Chicago generally doesn't make the top 10 worse cities(most cities that do are in Red States). Chicago may not have anything to brag about but they usually int he 11-20 range

 

[2kt09]

[YT]SqJ_4YhYMhE[/YT]

 

[Thundercrack85]

A lot of liberals know nothing about guns, that's true. But I do find a lot of people on the other side seem to be completely oblivious to the danger of having things like AK-47s and AR-15s on the market, in a country with weak gun control.

 

[2kt09]

A lot of liberals know nothing about guns, that's true. But I do find a lot of people on the other side seem to be completely oblivious to the danger of having things like AK-47s and AR-15s on the market, in a country with weak gun control.

A firearm is dangerous.
Ak-47's are illegal to be on the market.
AR-15s, as the video even implied and stated, are no more dangerous than hunting rifles.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Any hunting rifle that is semiautomatic. Modified (semiautomatic) AK-47s are widely available in the US.

To me the sensible thing seems to be to regulate semiautomatic weapons more stringently.

 

[2kt09]

Any hunting rifle that is semiautomatic. Modified (semiautomatic) AK-47s are widely available in the US.

Yeah, I'm still trying to find the current regulations by state. Some states allow ownership if purchased before the ban, others do not.

To me the sensible thing seems to be to regulate semiautomatic weapons more stringently.

It's a vague sentiment. I just know the homicide rates have gone down after 2007 since the assault weapons (semi-auto) ban expired in 2004. Plus, most articles will state those types are among the few contributors with mass shootings still being 2% of the gun problem.

 

[Sawyer]

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/l...rce=SocialFlowTwt_DCBrand&cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Take a guess to where the next mass shooting will take place? I think we've had one this year so far.

 

[Orba]

One thing I find amusing is that the Gun Industry in the US is having a big sales slump, they have spent the past 8 years keeping their sales up by whipping people into a frenzy that the Democrats will come and take everyone's guns but now that the Republicans are in control that fear has gone and sales have plummeted.

 

[TheCommissioner]

Gun sales have increased among minorities

Things I would like

- a uniform standard of ownership and permitting across all 50 states

- an arsenal tax - basically if you own 4-5 weapons or more, you pay an annual property tax - similar to car or house