The Guns thread

[redhawk23]

Beyond that, the white masculine identity in America has a big strain of frontier, wild west fantasy ingrained, the idea that you'd be the fastest strongest man with a gun. I'd say it's a major reason why zombie stories are so poplar here, an idea of society breaking down and it being a survival strugfle, man against man. It's all nonsense, but it is deeply rooted here in a way that you don't see other places.

 

[Orba]

Firstly, it's misconceived because no democracy has a total ban. Even in the UK, which has about the toughest gun laws anywhere, farmers, gamekeepers and sportsmen still use guns. They can only obtain the tools appropriate for the job, however, and they can't obtain any at all if they're lunatic.

More than just that have guns in the UK, my Dad has a firearms and shotgun license (the firearms license has tougher checks) and has a rifle, a bunch of 12 gauge shotguns and even an 8 bore shotgun. Basically the weapons have to be kept stored in a proper metal guncase (properly bolted to a wall) when not being used, these days they also prefer that people keep their ammo in an ammo case although it is not a requirement. Each year you get a visit from the Police who check that you still have all of the weapons registered to you and that they are stored safely, then they have a chat with you for a bit to see how the owner is doing and that there are no problems. And thats basically it for most gun owners in the UK.

Of course you have to get the license in the first place and plenty of people are turned down each year, if I remember for the shotgun license you have to have a background check as well as letters from a few land owners stating that you have permission to shoot on their land. And the licenses can be take away.

 

[Marvolo]

May I ask, and this is a genuine question, not trying to be funny but.....why?

Have you been the victim of such regular crime that you only feel safe by having a gun?

What is the reason for your abject refusal as a law-abiding citizen to feel the need to be armed?

Because I want to be. I'd rather have it and never need it than need it and not have it. Think of it as insurance.

 

[Marvolo]

This is what I find so infuriating. The gun nuts alternately treat the whole horror of the situation as a joke and then try to stifle debate and avoid consequential change by piously rehearsing the ridiculous "now's not the time" hypocrisy.

And Marvolo, I'm sorry but your argument against a ban is nonsense for two reasons.

Firstly, it's misconceived because no democracy has a total ban. Even in the UK, which has about the toughest gun laws anywhere, farmers, gamekeepers and sportsmen still use guns. They can only obtain the tools appropriate for the job, however, and they can't obtain any at all if they're lunatic.

Secondly, the suggestion that Americans lovemuhgunz because British colonists broke away from imperial control in the eighteenth century is less than compelling. Pretty much every country in Europe has a history of armed insurrection or "regime change", which is why most are now republics. But their menfolk don't have such a childish commitment to gun ownership. And, in any case, is there really an American monoculture that has developed in sublime isolation since the war of independence? Can every American trace their ancestry to that conflict? Of course not. It's just a fantasy shared and propagated by gun fans who are determined to keep their toys.

Your first point seems to support my argument. Even other countries don't have total bans. If Britain won't even try to do a total ban I doubt America would try such a thing.

As for your second point, see redhawk's posts.

 

[mclay18]

The slippery slope argument has SOME merit but let's be honest... From rank and file to the elected officials the overwhelming majority of Democrats aren't for stripping every single person of firearms. It's silly if anyone thinks that. However... The recalcitrance or the other side in the face of all this mass death on a regular basis to even countenance the mildest of gun control? That's pushing more people into the other side and the fringes of that group is starting to swell with folks that could be amendable to full on disarmament. So... Maybe instead of being so inflexible the GOP should think of compromising and allowing some common sense reform?

That's what gets me. They don't want to work with the Democrats on anything bipartisan (like a universal background check and semi-automatic rifle bans) unless their hand is forced or they risk their re-election chances next year.

 

[squeekness]

That's what gets me. They don't want to work with the Democrats on anything bipartisan (like a universal background check and semi-automatic rifle bans) unless their hand is forced or they risk their re-election chances next year.

Because they just love those yummy NRA dollars.

 

[NealKenneth]

Only a few days since the truck attack and we're already back to blaming guns? what a surprise

 

[Sithborg]

8 vs 26.

Also, which is more of a problem in the US? Mass shootings or use of vehicles for murder?

 

[redhawk23]

Only a few days since the truck attack and we're already back to blaming guns? what a surprise

It's almost as if one of those things is specifically engineered and marketed as a hyper efficient killing tool and the other is a vehicle.

We re only a morn out from an even larger shooting in which close to 60 people were killed and dozens of others were shot and lived.

 

[NealKenneth]

Well yeah...if you restrict the guns the crazies just use trucks instead. That is common sense, that's what I was saying, and you've just agreed with me unintentionally....

does this mean we can close the thread?

Are we going to try and make the argument that guns are inherintely more effective next? When it's barely been a year since the driver in France killed 86? That's almost 50% more kills than the US shooting spree record btw

 

[Sithborg]

And once again. 8. Vs. 26.

Violence will happen. But take the guns out of the picture, and the deaths seem to drop off rather radically.

 

[NealKenneth]

It's almost as if one of those things is specifically engineered and marketed as a hyper efficient killing tool and the other is a vehicle.

Are we going to try and make the argument that guns are inherintely more effective next?

haha wow it happened so fast I couldn't even beat the hive-mind to it...yawn

In places where citizens have less acess to guns, the crazies use whatever. Black market guns, knives (a stabber in Japan killed 19 in an attack the same month as the France driver attack last year btw.) And basically the only difference is that the disarmed citizens were unable to defence themselves.

Is no one going to talk about the fact that this spree in Texas was ended because a neighbor to the church started shooting back?

 

[NealKenneth]

And once again. 8. Vs. 26.

86 vs 26. FTFY

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_attack

 

[Sithborg]

haha wow it happened so fast I couldn't even beat the hive-mind to it...yawn

In places where citizens have less acess to guns, the crazies use whatever. Black market guns, knives (a stabber in Japan killed 19 in an attack the same month as the France driver attack last year btw.) And basically the only difference is that the disarmed citizens were unable to defence themselves.

Is no one going to talk about the fact that this spree in Texas was ended because a neighbor to the church started shooting back?

After he had already killed so many. Tons to celebrate.

 

[NealKenneth]

Actually it's very interesting to note the correlation between gun control and the effectiveness of these sort of attacks.

Back in the day before gun-free zones and tons of permits/restrictions the sprees were always single digit. Back in the day when no one thought twice if the average guy was packing a six-shooter. Now that we've passed all these laws disarming the citizenry and a decades-long media campaign to shame gunowners...we can't seem to keep the killings under a dozen. And, of course, in nations where they restrict access to guns even more, people with knives are able to rack up almost 20 kills. Try a knife attack in Texas and see what happens!

But as a crazy, nothing beats driving a truck over a giant crowd of people who you know have no weapons at all. Hence the reason the driver in France killed 86 when the most succesful shooter in American history was barely able to reach two-thirds of that.

But yeah...let's make ourselves more like those countires!

 

[terry78]

I feel like most people should learn how to handle and use a gun, but there's no need to have like a ****ing armory in your basement or whatever. We're not gonna turn into The Walking Dead overnight.

 

[Sithborg]

Actually it's very interesting to note the correlation between gun control and the effectiveness of these sort of attacks.

Back in the day before gun-free zones and tons of permits/restrictions the sprees were always single digit. Back in the day when no one thought twice if the average guy was packing a six-shooter. Now that we've passed all these laws disarming the citizenry and a decades-long media campaign to shame gunowners...we can't seem to keep the killings under a dozen. And, of course, in nations where they restrict access to guns even more, people with knives are able to rack up almost 20 kills. Try a knife attack in Texas and see what happens!

But as a crazy, nothing beats driving a truck over a giant crowd of people who you know have no weapons at all. Hence the reason the driver in France killed 86 when the most succesful shooter in American history was barely able to reach two-thirds of that.

But yeah...let's make ourselves more like those countires!

And Tim McVeigh and the 9/11 terrorists easily eclipsed that with no guns. But, what happens more often, mass shootings or vehicle attacks?

But hey, there is no way to prevent it, so why even try...

 

[TheCardPlayer]

NealKenneth, your arguments are incredibly disingenuous and completely ignore reality. Where were these heroic gun owners to defend themselves in Las Vegas? In Texas? Why do you bring up events from other countries, that could have been much worse if the perps had firearms? If the Texas church shooter DIDN'T have a gun, do you think he could have as easily killed so many? What black market guns? Where does he go to get these magical illegal guns? He goes into a random alley and yells out "Give me guns please! I have money!?

There have been 307 mass shootings in the US this year. Just THIS year. Show me all of these massacres in other countries with better gun laws. Also no one is "attacking" guns. We are attacking the bad laws that make this crap happen over and over. And that will keep happening over and over.

 

[DeadPresident]

Don’t feed the trolls, y’all.

 

[NealKenneth]

I think there are a number of factors at play here. The two most dangerous are gun-free zones and the cultural shaming of gunowners such that good people are rarely armed in public (and the crazy know that.)

Schools, concert venues, churches. Easy to see why a crazy person would use these as the place of attack and, in fact, they do so with 100% accuracy. Since their creation, there has never been a shooting spree in American history where the shooter and the victims were not in a gun free zone. But the other half of it is that people who could do more in a situation like this are treated as the enemy. I don't know how old this church is but, being Texas, I would assume if this shooter had tried this at the same mass 100 years ago he would have been dropped by the twenty guys in the congregation openly carrying a six-shooter for easy access.

Another factor is that often the crazy has no motive outside of infamy, and the media is very complicit in this. Oftentimes parading the crazy around like a celebrity until every house in America knows his name.

And, of course, since the media is in the pocket of the establishment, if you are a crazy you are going to use a gun. Bombs/vehicle/knives don't get nearly as much coverage on the news. A shooter will get two weeks, anything else is two days.

So yeah, if you are a crazy looking for infamy....just find the nearest gun-free zone and be sure to use a gun. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[NealKenneth]

NealKenneth, your arguments are incredibly disingenuous and completely ignore reality. Where were these heroic gun owners to defend themselves in Las Vegas? In Texas?

You know the attack in Texas was ended because a neighbor of the church opened fire on the shooter, right?

Can't blame you if you hadn't heard that, of course. The media prefers to bury unfortunate facts like that. As for Las Vegas, Mandalay Bay is a gun-free zone so all the good guys were disarmed. Sad

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

You know the attack in Texas was ended because a neighbor of the church opened fire on the shooter, right?

Can't blame you if you hadn't heard that, of course. The media prefers to bury unfortunate facts like that. As for Las Vegas, Mandalay Bay is a gun-free zone so all the good guys were disarmed. Sad

GTFO here with that BS. The "good guys" were armed, they were the police that stormed the room and killed him. Had a bunch of armed citizens started blindly firing at the hotel or into the crowd there would have been more deaths/injuries.

Posters that don't use logic. #SAD

 

[Sithborg]

You know the attack in Texas was ended because a neighbor of the church opened fire on the shooter, right?

Can't blame you if you hadn't heard that, of course. The media prefers to bury unfortunate facts like that. As for Las Vegas, Mandalay Bay is a gun-free zone so all the good guys were disarmed. Sad

He didn't stop it. The neighbor got involved when the shooter was done with the church and already leaving.

And you know that casino's have armed guards, right?

 

[NealKenneth]

So armed guards and police are not enough and we need to stop disarming citizens. Glad we agree.

 

[Jericholyte]

Because I want to be. I'd rather have it and never need it than need it and not have it. Think of it as insurance.

Ok, this is the argument I never understand, "I want a gun because I can have a gun." There has to be a deeper, underlying reason why you feel the need to be armed specifically with a gun. If it was for example home invasion, why prefer a gun to, say, a bat? Again, I don't mean any of this as being sarcastic or as having a go at you, I'm genuinely interested to see the differing viewpoint.

May I ask what kind of gun you own?