JohnGalt posted:

Seriouspost:

Il compromise on guns. Repeal the NFA in exchange for public access to NICS and subsidized firearms training courses.

Fang posted:

Why aren't arson and bombing deaths worth putting effort into preventing?

Bryter posted:

I don't recall saying they aren't.

Ddraig posted:

In general votes don't kill people, and aren't designed to.

Unless you vote for Republicans, I guess.

Fang posted:

If voting Republican kills people, then it sounds like you'd be in favor of vote control. It opens up possibilities to restrict exercise of the right along lines that favor your chosen demographics.

Fang posted:

Job Truniht posted:

Ammunition is a much easier expression of intent and is more comparable to loading up on ammonium nitrate than how many Glocks you have sitting around your house. If you're serious about stopping mass shooting, start with the amount of bulllets people are allowed to carry around. It probably won't lower homicides, but it's not like the Brady Bill did fuckall to stop gun violence in this country anyways.

various cheeses posted:

That's a reasonable response, although warning shots into the air are not recommended in both the legal or tactical (I guess that would be the word for it?) sense, because those bullets fall somewhere. Long story short I guess, use the gun to quickly end the beatdown - not necessarily even firing a single shot.

As for yours:
Step one: cry my eyes out, but I'm sure as hell not going to turn the gun on myself and leave my youngest daughter alone in the world. That alone is worth living for.

I'm guessing it was post-partum depression leading to a murder-suicide?

Fang posted:

You said that "...instituting policies like fire drills to minimise the potential for harm are good ideas," for arson and bombing, but then implied they were insufficient for guns by suggesting bans for guns. If policies are enough for arson and bombing, why not guns? Are you just suggesting solutions based on how easy you think they'll be to implement instead of whether they'll solve the problem?

IAMNOTADOCTOR posted:

[i]


Here's my scenario, which I encountered this year visiting your otherwise lovely country:

You own a gun and have a happy family life. You own this weapon for their protection as you live in a wealthy area where there were a few break-ins. You keep the unloaded gun safely tucked away on the top shelf of your closet. The only trouble in your life is that your 9 year old son has some issues at school with falling grades. You and your wife have talked to him about it and he's committed to no longer being distracted by some of the more obnoxious schoolmates. Your wife is having issues at work, has troubling getting out of bed in the morning and seems a bit listless but you attribute it to sleeplessness and fatigue following the birth of your youngest daughter.

You get a call at 6pm by a hysteric neighbour, your wife/son was shot and transported to the nearest hospital. You cut-off the conversation after hearing this and make a new record time through traffic to the hospital. The nurses explain that your wife/son was pronounced dead on arrival. You are greeted by a doctor who has seen this all before so many times that he asks the questions with an almost bored tone, while a goon looks over his shoulder: did you notice anything about his/her mood? did your wife/son have trouble getting out of bed? did this interfere with work and daily activities? Questions with terrifyingly mundane, a-specific answers that will be positive for almost everyone at some point in their lives.

You, my dear plate of various cheeses, conceal carry a snub-nosed pistol and sit in the parking lot, what do you do?

edit: you are not making GBS threads in the parking lot, i hope.

JT Jag posted:

Might as well not regulate anything because all regulation has a vague similarity to poll testing, right? Drivers licenses are just as abhorrent too.

Tezzor posted:

This is something I've noticed before, and I just want to point it out here: Gun nuts literally do not understand the definition of "compromise." In a compromise, party A gives something up, and party B gives something up, in order to agree and get something else. Under "JohnGalt"'s proposal, people who want gun control give up the 80 year old National Firearms Amendment, which means that they give up regulations on automatic weapons, explosive weapons, and suppressors. In exchange, gun fans get public access to NICS, and also our tax money to subsidize their hobby. Do you see where they are giving up anything?

Fang posted:

That's not an equivalent scenario. It would work only if someone had posited that someone jumps out of the alley and beats your friend to the point of brain damage while you look on, helpless, crying. You're positing a negative outcome right along with the setup. Did you really think your scenario was a parallel to the open-ended question to which you were responding, or did you just want to tell that story?

JohnGalt posted:

I'm sorry, maybe you missed the part where people who like exercising their second amendment have been conceding parts of their right to bear arms since the mid 1930s. Since then, gun regulation has overwhelmingly moved toward limiting that right. People who don't like guns have something like 80 years of compromising to do.

JohnGalt posted:

I'm sorry

Tezzor posted:

Yes, I have noticed that the arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice. Why do you ask? It doesn't make your current proposal a "compromise."

Rent-A-Cop posted:

You should be, because apparently your ignore list is missing an entry.

JohnGalt posted:

Yeah, as long as its a long term effort, depriving people of constitutional rights is okay. Especially if it's roots are focused on keeping guns out of the hands of black people. Gotta keep those minorities in their place though.

Ddraig posted:

In a hypothetical world where all guns were removed, it would be impossible for a gun to be used to kill someone. In a hypothetical world where all elements responsible for bombs and arson were removed we would not be able to cook, clean or sustain life at all.

Ddraig posted:

there are many, many legitimate means why you may want to use elements in creating such things in other applications that don't involve making bombs or arson.

Tezzor posted:

Whenever gunhavers make the halting, deer-standing-up-for-first-time attempt at accusing others of racism I always keep in mind that gun owning is the most systemically racist hobby subculture outside of the Klan.

IAMNOTADOCTOR posted:

Nope, it was the kid committing suicide. He was bullied at school we think, as a doc you don't get the whole story, the wife just had a (normal) minor depressive episode. The proportionally biggest victims of America's lack of gun regulation are children and women. As far as I know the dad and mom did not commit suicide.

Now my question to you becomes, should the evidence about the effectiveness of readily available fire-arms in preventing both your and my scenario's determine whether or not new gun regulations are enforced?

IAMNOTADOCTOR posted:

I'm sorry but that's inherent to gun suicide, its abrupt, often unexpected and not something owning another gun can do anything about. I find it difficult to come up with any realistic story about gun-suicide where owning the gun is going to help though. If you have a suggestion, let me know.

Tezzor posted:

Whenever gunhavers make the halting, deer-standing-up-for-first-time attempt at accusing others of racism I always keep in mind that gun owning is the most systemically racist hobby subculture outside of the Klan.

Fang posted:

You know those virulently anti-gay Republicans who get caught trying to pick up guys in a bathroom after years of railing against homosexuality? For some reason that popped into my head just now but I don't know why.

JohnGalt posted:

Sorry, I'm not white. The first step towards checking your priveledge is acknowledging that you don't trust people of the darker complexion with any kind of power.

Tezzor posted:

Smells are known to be tied most strongly to memories.

Tezzor posted:

Whenever gunhavers make the halting, deer-standing-up-for-first-time attempt at accusing others of racism I always keep in mind that gun owning is the most systemically racist hobby subculture outside of the Klan.

Fang posted:

You said that "...instituting policies like fire drills to minimise the potential for harm are good ideas," for arson and bombing, but then implied they were insufficient for guns by suggesting bans for guns. If policies are enough for arson and bombing, why not guns? Are you just suggesting solutions based on how easy you think they'll be to implement instead of whether they'll solve the problem?

Tezzor posted:

Smells are known to be tied most strongly to memories.

Tezzor posted:

I have no idea what race you are. I would hope you are a white dude who is lying because the alternative is that I am face to face with our country's shameful failure to educate minorities and that would be very sad.

IAMNOTADOCTOR posted:

Nope, it was the kid committing suicide. He was bullied at school we think, as a doc you don't get the whole story, the wife just had a (normal) minor depressive episode. The proportionally biggest victims of America's lack of gun regulation are children and women. As far as I know the dad and mom did not commit suicide.

Now my question to you becomes, should the evidence about the effectiveness of readily available fire-arms in preventing both your and my scenario's determine whether or not new gun regulations are enforced?

Bryter posted:

No, I'm suggesting an easy solution that I believe will be effective.

-Troika- posted:

Funny you should mention that, since the origins of gun control in this country are rooted in keeping black people from having guns. Of course, don't let anything inconvenient like the facts stop you-- you never have before, after all~

various cheeses posted:

Wait I'm confused, did only the son commit suicide in the story? I kept seeing wife/son and wasn't sure if it was two suicides, or like an interchangeable person for the purposes of the thread.

#1 thing they did wrong was leaving the gun in a place where the kid has access to it. That poo poo goes in the safe when unattended specifically to avoid this type of thing and also theft. My state actually has a law making it illegal to leave a gun somewhere a minor could gain access to it. No idea how often it gets enforced or obeyed though. Also, why didn't he talk to his wife, or get her help for depression, or just lock up his gun?

Fang posted:

I was trying to archly imply that your accusations of racism stemmed from racist attitudes on your part. As evidence I offer your assertion that white people are smarter than minorities:

various cheeses posted:

I like this image of Tezzor sitting on a pile of guns like that ZerglingMinor picture. He is one of us, yet he must portray himself as the enemy, arguing against us, ridiculing us, and attacking us at every turn. We grow stronger, our arguments and gibe remarks hammered into razor edges. A tear comes to his eye, we hate him, but he is like a proud father watching over his children that will never know him.

Killer robot posted:

The thing is it still really isn't comparable at all. There's no real ammunition equivalent to the difference between how much fertilizer you need as a casual gardener and how much you need to blow up a school. The amount of ammunition needed in a fairly short time frame to become or remain proficient with firearms is greater than you need for a mass shooting, and that's even if you're happy with a de facto ban on recreational target shooting. Even magazine size limits wouldn't make much difference in the nuts and bolts of mass shootings: when magazine size limits those it's more often because some comically oversized 100-round drum was unreliable and jammed, or even because someone grabbed a hold of it, rather than because reloading small ones made an opening. And that's just big mass shootings: a small box of ammo is more than enough for any other murdering you might care to do.

Ammo limits is a One Simple Trick type thing that's understandably popular in standup comedy routines, and would be a great Trump sound byte if there were still a lot of low-information anti-gun conservatives for him to be targeting, but it's not really sound policy.