|
DemeaninDemon posted:Uh voting is a fundamental human right and owning a firearm isn't. That where you were going with this? Many would argue that owning a means to defend yourself is a basic human right. E: the US constitution for example. Miltank fucked around with this message at 19:58 on May 18, 2014 |
#
?
May 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
This'll be an emotional wedge issue until we can get broad, high-quality epidemiological research into gun crime and firearms legislation to really start nailing poo poo down. The ban on the use of federal funding for 'gun control research' warrants much more attention than it presently receives.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Mons Hubris posted:Well well, looks like the Something Awful forums have their own Benghazi. What else are you hiding, comes along bort? Great now we have two Benghazis.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
greatn posted:Great now we have two Benghazis. Two Benghazis that we know of.  Sounds like we need another investigative committee just to determine how many there really are!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:This'll be an emotional wedge issue until we can get broad, high-quality epidemiological research into gun crime and firearms legislation to really start nailing poo poo down. The ban on the use of federal funding for 'gun control research' warrants much more attention than it presently receives. Agreed. Especially because I suspect the results will show that by far the most effective way to reduce homicide is through extensive social welfare programs.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
If guns are like cars, what is public transit in this analogy?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:What you're saying is its not an ban because its impossible to keep people from buying a gun illegally by lying on their permit application? Yes it's not a ban. Do you really never use your guns for anything besides  self-protection? I mean I don't know maybe I'm crazy to love target shooting and plinking electronics scrap.Because you can own many kinds of guns that aren't the dreaded shotgun in those countries. Miltank posted:Many would argue that owning a means to defend yourself is a basic human right. Did you know there's tons of weapons you can own that aren't some random specific model of gun? Crazy I know. Chantilly Say posted:If guns are like cars, what is public transit in this analogy? Longbows.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
Which crazy specific gun is it that you want to ban?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:If guns are like cars, what is public transit in this analogy?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:But people still manage to own guns with these "impossible restrictions" do our car restrictions make it impossible to own a car? Which restrictions are only doable by the upper middle class, background checks, safety classes? Being a MA resident the only issue I have with MA laws is that after you meet all the requirements you're then subject to the whim of your local police chief. However in MA I can legally own and carry a firearm for personal protection (assuming you don't live in a town like I did growing up where the police chief instituted a de facto ban by refusing to issue licenses), in three out of those four countries that is illegal. Also this is pretty much my point, there is a large group of people who want to effectively ban guns but are quiet about it because its still considered a political loser. "But thats because they should be banned" does not counter this statement it reinforces it. I didn't post to start an argument over the merits of gun control, I posted to state that the reason every bit of restriction on guns gets resisted regardless of its merit is because gun ownership supporters (for lack of a better term) do not trust the motivation behind the regulations, and their distrust is not without merit.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
Well I certainly hosed that up. I just wanted to draw a parallel between what gun-lovers fear and what's really happening with voting laws, honest! 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Which crazy specific gun is it that you want to ban? What do you mean "want" to ban? There's a bunch of specific models that are already banned and have been for years, despite you being able to get very close knockoffs pretty much unrestricted. Usually because some random politician got a bug up their butt about the Hasenpfeffer 16mm.782 with special scope.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
I propose that someone start a thread where guns can be debated calmly, rationally, and not anywhere else.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Not to interrupt the always productive gun chat, but I loved this: http://www.vox.com/2014/5/16/5717674/obamas-plan-to-let-putin-hang-himself-is-working It would be wonderful to see a large, real world, positive impact of globalization being its ability to check unfettered aggression.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:What do you mean "want" to ban? There's a bunch of specific models that are already banned and have been for years, despite you being able to get very close knockoffs pretty much unrestricted. Usually because some random politician got a bug up their butt about the Hasenpfeffer 16mm.782 with special scope. Correct. And this is dumb and bad right?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Correct. And this is dumb and bad right? No, it's just utterly irrelevant to rights or anything. It's like banning new purchases of the 1999 Plymouth Neon while keeping the 1999 Chrysler Neon.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Yes it's not a ban. Do you really never use your guns for anything besides Thanks for proving my point I guess? Also its hard to illegally use you're target rifle for personal protection when its illegal (not to mention impractical) to carry the loving thing. Also in Australia at least you have to prove that you not only have a specific need for a weapon that isn't "the dreaded shotgun" but you also have to specifically prove that "the dreaded shotgun" is incapable of filling that need. So again, you're flat lying, and again, proving my point.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Thanks for proving my point I guess? Also its hard to illegally use you're target rifle for personal protection when its illegal (not to mention impractical) to carry the loving thing. That Australian law doesn't sound too bad whats the problem with it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:No, it's just utterly irrelevant to rights or anything. It's like banning new purchases of the 1999 Plymouth Neon while keeping the 1999 Chrysler Neon. Right, so its dumb and bad and a waste of government resources.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Thanks for proving my point I guess? Also its hard to illegally use you're target rifle for personal protection when its illegal (not to mention impractical) to carry the loving thing. It's impractical to use most guns for personal protection, yes. Even though you somehow think it's important to be able to declare you're buying said impractical weapons for that purpose. Yeah and Australia somehow has an awful lot of people able to meet the requirements to own weapons? With a bunch of them not owning the shotguns. Sooo you're the liar here. Miltank posted:Right, so its dumb and bad and a waste of government resources. No it's not, it's just utterly irrelevant. I used the model year for a reason: 1999 Plymouth Neons obviously stopped being made before 2000 so the law against buying new ones doesn't do anything. Yet somehow people like you would declare it to be clearly one step away from banning all Chrysler Corporation vehicles. It's on the order of when Bob Localpol introduces a state assembly bill to dedicate May 19, 2014 as Official State Beet Farmer Day. Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 20:27 on May 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
withak posted:I propose that someone start a thread where guns can be debated calmly, rationally, and not anywhere else. A guns and circumcision discussion thread.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Which crazy specific gun is it that you want to ban? Well the other weekend we had the NRA calling for smart guns to be banned, gun nuts is during threats, and people here backing the nuts, so I guess people want to start there. The takeaway though should be that if other countries have the same or greater gun ownership rates, without our mass shootings and violence, something else is the problem
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
a new purchase would in my mind include a newly completed transaction for an pre-owned whatever. this is dumb and the implementation of these laws are a waste of lawmaker time which is bad.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
I don't really give a poo poo about gun control anymore now that I know for certain nothing will change the mind of gun lovers, and it's a losing issue for liberals. And yet, something about it still bugs me. I have a cousin (twice my age, but still my cousin), who told me, when we were both over at his father's house, that gun rights are the most important rights we have as Americans. As I've learned from here and elsewhere, this is not a particularly unique opinion. There's a large number of crazy, but widespread opinions, and I've come to understand why people hold most of them, but this one just taunts me with its incomprehensibility. I've tried out numerous explanations, and none of them really explain it. I mean, why guns? Why not free speech? Voting? A right to a fair trial? Citizenship in general? Economic freedoms? I know all the normal explanations, but none of them fully explain why these integral, important rights matter less than being able to possess an instrument of death. Especially in the case of my cousin, who isn't in any way racist or privileged. Hell, he served a five year sentence in prison for drug charges. Now he runs a small construction business, adopted his girlfriend's kid, and has had another with her. I guess he's mad that he can't own a gun because he's a felon, but that can't really be it, can it? please somebody explain this to me.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Miltank posted:a new purchase would in my mind include a newly completed transaction for an pre-owned whatever. this is dumb and the implementation of these laws are a waste of lawmaker time which is bad. Yeah see the thing is almost all of these laws that even get proposed let alone enacted consist of "you can't import any brand new units of X specific gun" or rarely "no more X specific gun model may be manufactured here". The manufacturer's going to come out with a new model regardless, and if the particular design is very popular then close clones can easily come out to replicate the look and feel. Fried Chicken posted:he takeaway though should be that if other countries have the same or greater gun ownership rates, without our mass shootings and violence, something else is the problem And they do is the hell of the thing. The US has a very high total guns to population rate, but ownership rates country wide aren't that high above your typical country and on a per state basis it can dip a lot. Of course other countries do things like "not being allowed to buy 5 pistols just for the hell of it" or "have to say a reason to have a gun besides 'I want it'", which are clearly super-bans on guns.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:I don't really give a poo poo about gun control anymore now that I know for certain nothing will change the mind of gun lovers, and it's a losing issue for liberals. And yet, something about it still bugs me. I have a cousin (twice my age, but still my cousin), who told me, when we were both over at his father's house, that gun rights are the most important rights we have as Americans. As I've learned from here and elsewhere, this is not a particularly unique opinion. So yeah, I am thinking kung-fu movie logic. edit: I think Mao Zedong said something along those lines too. Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 20:57 on May 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Holy poo poo what the gently caress is that thing, it looks like a Warhammer 40K cover.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
greatn posted:Great now we have two Benghazis. 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
It's for self-defense so I can protect my social security check/bitcoins from the knockout gangs/statists, why are you ignorant gun grabbers so afraid of big black guns? Big, thick, black guns with long hard barrels glistening with gun oil and ready to shoot, I wish I had one in my hands right now. Also we need open carry laws so I can walk around in public with one of them dangling from my waist at all times. ReindeerF posted:We seriously need to get President Obama a pet raccoon just for all the unintentional and public verbal faux pas that would follow, not to mention the explosion of wordplay jokes and bumper stickers from the FREEP crowd. It'd be like racist catnip.  Not quite a raccoon I know, but close.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Holy poo poo what the gently caress is that thing, it looks like a Warhammer 40K cover. That, unless I mistake my WWII railroad cannons, is either Schwerer Gustav or Dora, two 800mm superheavy artillery pieces that are among the most extreme examples of the Nazi mania for gigantism in weapons systems.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Holy poo poo what the gently caress is that thing, it looks like a Warhammer 40K cover. Probably this.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:You're claiming that the only guns allowed in those four countries is shotguns, which is laughably obvious as false to everyone here. No you're lying out of embarrassment. I'm claiming that's your position. Am I wrong?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:I don't really give a poo poo about gun control anymore now that I know for certain nothing will change the mind of gun lovers, and it's a losing issue for liberals. And yet, something about it still bugs me. I have a cousin (twice my age, but still my cousin), who told me, when we were both over at his father's house, that gun rights are the most important rights we have as Americans. As I've learned from here and elsewhere, this is not a particularly unique opinion. I'll take a stab at it. I like to reduce all political arguments to an equivalent argument in a hypothetical school-yard. What I can rationalize gun-right advocates and their belief of it's importance is that it's cyclical. They believe it's the most important thing for AMERICA so why bother with all the inferior issues? It's literally like a stubborn kid in a school yard going "can't hear you! can't hear you! nah nah nah!" Same thing goes for almost any and all ______-loving advocate/nut/lover. It makes sense to them and everyone else are loving stupid because they are not us, so why listen? And I hear ya about sometimes very normal people can have very strong beliefs. It just makes it more difficult.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:
The reason people buy so many different guns is because of the regulations on what type can be used on what animal on what weeks in what season. The hoarders and nut jobs who want them just to fulfill their psychological needs are far away the minority to being a rounding error rather than anything that matters Fried Chicken fucked around with this message at 21:30 on May 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:That, unless I mistake my WWII railroad cannons, is either Schwerer Gustav or Dora, two 800mm superheavy artillery pieces that are among the most extreme examples of the Nazi mania for gigantism in weapons systems. Good sweet Lord. Wouldn't ten 80mm pieces have done the job without having to spend years making something so...ridiculous? Maybe not, I dunno how beefy the Maginot Line actually was. I mean, did the Nazis ever actually get to fire the thing?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Good sweet Lord. Wouldn't ten 80mm pieces have done the job without having to spend years making something so...ridiculous? A lot of it consisted of deep underground bunkers made of reinforced concrete so not really. It was made specifically to take them out in the event of a frontal assault on the Maginot Line that never happened. They ended up using it as a siege weapon in Russia I think. Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 21:29 on May 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Good sweet Lord. Wouldn't ten 80mm pieces have done the job without having to spend years making something so...ridiculous? The idea massive super weapons would win the war for Germany was a pretty commonly held belief amongst the crazier members of the Germany military in WW2. The Tiger was a massive waste of resources that could have been devoted to just making more Panthers, which were a far better tank for cost than the tiger. Still Germany was hosed anyway because once the Soviets got going there was pretty much nothing they could do to stop them. e: Super Heavy artillery such as train guns were used on the Eastern Front to help break the Russian defenses, but eventually they fell out of use due to how fast the Russians were advancing.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:The reason people by so many different guns is because of the regulations on what type can be used on what animal on what weeks in what season. The hoarders and nut jobs who want them just to fulfill their psychological needs are far away the minority to being a rounding error rather than anything that matters Also multiple guns for multiple family members.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Maybe not, I dunno how beefy the Maginot Line actually was. I mean, did the Nazis ever actually get to fire the thing? Yes, but not at the Maginot Line. They just went around and attacked from behind, where the Line was not fortified and could not aim its guns.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
Alexzandvar posted:The idea massive super weapons would win the war for Germany was a pretty commonly held belief amongst the crazier members of the Germany military in WW2. It's worth remembering that America did crank out a massive war winning super weapon - the atom bomb
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 21:31
|
|