|
showbiz_liz posted:I was raised in a house with guns and am a lot more sympathetic than the average liberal to the historical arguments for the Second Amendment. It was a nice idea: give the people a way to resist potential oppressors and outside threats. But the world is a completely different place than it was when the Bill of Rights was written. The military has flying murder robots and civilization-destroying bombs now, and instead of banding together with our neighbors and fighting off some terrible enemy we're taking shots at each other in Walmarts. It's time to pack it in. It's okay if you think that, and it's not an entirely unreasonable stance even if gun violence keeps stubbornly decreasing no matter whether local laws are tightened or loosened. What's less reasonable is pretending judicial scrutiny of other rights doesn't exist, acting like just this once "The people" means "ARE TROOPS specifically, but actually not any other citizens", or otherwise treating guns uniquely as an open target for tortured legal justifications you wouldn't use for other topics. And that's what a lot of people both in this thread and in gun control discussion as a whole like to do.
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
mattdizzle, where do you stand on the concept of a centralized database? i support stuff like waiting lists and people on the watch list being black listed but i think a database is a bridge too far for me. also another possibility which doesnt come up often is just leave guns alone and heavily regulate firing caps. which i think is a slick alternative.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
LGD posted:It's the part of the sentence that actually has instructive content and a makes an actionable declaration as "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state," is very much not a complete thought and does not suggest that it should limit or modify what follows, it's a preface. I like this and will save it for later arguments
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Crain posted:Not to be that guy again since I know this is a joke, but now you have to define "from scratch". Sten SMGs have like eight parts. They were basically designed to be easy to churn out for any random French resistance member with a regular old machine shop. It isn't markedly harder to make something semi auto. Yet nobody does it. This is presumably partly because they can get legal guns, but I also think it's a bit like why relatively few people have even basic understanding of how computers work, even though far more people use computers every day than guns. vvv what drives people to make deliberately inflammatory low effort posts alongside their requests to not discuss the subject? Though I agree about changing the subject. This is mostly just going in circles. At least cratering is funny. Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jun 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
just repeal the second amendment, anything less is meaningless ineffectual garbage because manchildren want to hang on to their murder toys and will go to completely insane lengths to do so and for gently caress's sake change the topic in this thread. There is so much more interesting presidential candidate cratering going on
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Sten SMGs have like eight parts. They were basically designed to be easy to churn out for any random French resistance member with a regular old machine shop. It isn't markedly harder to make something semi auto. Oh yeah, I don't disagree with that. I'm just arguing against the "I'm going to be clever and sneak in a restriction" arguments. Which are just a dead end. My stance is hard line restrictions on broad capabilities. Don't ban AR-15's and removable mags, just ban Semi-automatic weapons. With terms defined as broadly as possible. Don't ban magazine tube extensions on shotguns with pistol grips painted black, ban semi auto and pump action shotguns. Again, defined as broadly as possible. I agree that there will always be people who can and will make their own guns, even for reasons completely separate from wanting to use them. They are very interesting machines and the mechanics that go into them can be likened to clockwork. But I don't think that is a reason to not go forward with a ban.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
How effective can any gun control measures be, considering the huge amount of guns already in the US?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Sp1r0_Agn3W posted:mattdizzle, where do you stand on the concept of a centralized database? i support stuff like waiting lists and people on the watch list being black listed but i think a database is a bridge too far for me. I agree, if we're agreeing that the point of owning guns is to resist oppressive government and or foreign invasion creating a handy-dandy list of who to round up and execute is counterintuitive
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:How effective can any gun control measures be, considering the huge amount of guns already in the US? Beginning with a small effect, then increasing in effectiveness as time goes on. As is the case with any law.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
BROCK LESBIAN posted:The second amendment says people can keep and bear arms, but it doesn't say anything about buying them! Ah, the Air Bud loophole.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Xanderkish posted:Beginning with a small effect, then increasing in effectiveness as time goes on. As is the case with any law. *cough* war on drugs but worse *cough*
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Can we just kill all white people? That'd help so much.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
In an effort to right the boat:  The Washington Post posted:
Link is in the image. Didn't see this posted earlier.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:*cough* war on drugs but worse *cough* Nah, that'd be silly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:If you ban semi automatic guns i'm getting in a gunfight with the police and dying. I feel like i'm being more reasonable than you. Am I reading this wrong or did you just say you would fight to the death if the police tried to take your guns away
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Am I reading this wrong or did you just say you would fight to the death if the police tried to take your guns away I was so confused as to why an entire page had gone and no one had mentioned that sentence. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
I did offer lots of other options he didnt think to quote. I do of course not intend for this to happen. (Do i seriously need to say this?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:Proposal: if you want a gun you have to make it yourself from scratch, like a lightsaber. I think we may have just solved this problem. Congratulations all around!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
I always enjoy the part of gun chat where someone says "If you attempt to implement gun control policy X I will use my guns to murder people. Can you please be more reasonable, it's incredibly unreasonable to do something that causes me to decide to murder people with my guns. I guess only one of is is willing to be reasonable here."
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Am I reading this wrong or did you just say you would fight to the death if the police tried to take your guns away He said that but he actually wouldn't, lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Am I reading this wrong or did you just say you would fight to the death if the police tried to take your guns away I'm not seeing the issue
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:*cough* war on drugs but worse *cough* MattD1zzl3 posted:I did offer lots of other options he didnt think to quote. I do of course not intend for this to happen. (Do i seriously need to say this?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
people kill census agents, imagine the hell raised with a door to door gun confiscation
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:Sure, because a difficult-to-make, difficult-to-conceal thing that police and politicians have no need for, that sells at maybe $100 per pound, and that most people will never need to buy more than one of? That's going to be way harder to deal with than an easy-to-make, easy-to-conceal thing that police enjoy as much as the rest of us, that sells at maybe $100,000 per pound, and that many people literally can't stop buying. Obviously. There's already millions of guns in America, and a well maintained gun can last for centuries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Everywhere outside of the deep south and flyovers HATE Ted Cruz. What does he think he can possibly win that Romney didn't?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:How effective can any gun control measures be, considering the huge amount of guns already in the US? That's why there should be a buyback program at the same time. Like what Australia did.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
I don't see why sending cops to millions of houses across the US to confiscate legally purchased property could result in any violence. I mean, first of all, we're dealing with the police here. So right off the bat the safety of the civilians is guaranteed. And secondly, people don't mind having their stuff taken. That's just human nature.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
If you're willing to shoot a lawfully empowered agent of a legitimate state authorized to confiscate your guns you shouldn't be owning them in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Everywhere outside of the deep south and flyovers HATE Ted Cruz. What does he think he can possibly win that Romney didn't? People think the silent majority still exists. No sorry they died.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:There's already millions of guns in America, and a well maintained gun can last for centuries. And your point is? The vast majority of them are owned by a tiny minority of Americas. And 78% of Americans own 0 guns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
The Larch posted:If you're willing to shoot a lawfully empowered agent of a legitimate state authorized to confiscate your guns you shouldn't be owning them in the first place. Yeah that kind of attitude is the kind of thing that should make you fail the psych evaluation that will be required for owning a gun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
My argument for banning all guns is that people opposed to banning all guns say poo poo likequote:If you ban semi automatic guns i'm getting in a gunfight with the police and dying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
The Rokstar posted:My argument for banning all guns is that people opposed to banning all guns say poo poo like Indeed. That was truly a serious post and a reflection of his true mental state. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:Proposal: if you want a gun you have to make it yourself from scratch, like a lightsaber. Ah-ha! I've been thinking about this all wrong. I need to nationalize all weapons manufacturers or take away the business licenses of anyone who does. Nothing could be more liberating for the American people than artisan, hand crafted guns! As guns have more rights than people it is obviously an affront to their existence that there are mass produced, poorly ornamented weapons flooding our streets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Indeed. That was truly a serious post and a reflection of his true mental state. Yes. Remember kids, if it is anti-gun hyperbole it is true and scary and if it is pro-murder hyperbole it is just a joke you idiot
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:There's already millions of guns in America, and a well maintained gun can last for centuries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Sp1r0_Agn3W posted:people kill census agents, imagine the hell raised with a door to door gun confiscation This isn't even necessary. Do buybacks for the now illegal handguns and military style rifles or whatever they come up with. People that don't go along with it can keep their toys but if they're ever caught with them it's confiscated and they're hit with a pretty hefty fine. Something that will actually hurt. You'll probably get Bird Refuge 2: This time more of them die somewhere, but I'm ok with that. They'll just have to buy another F350 that will never tow anything or see any kind of offroad action for compensation for their micro penises.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Even just restricting future sales while keeping current under-regulated guns in owner's hands will do a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:Oh, it's not a short-term victory by any means. Especially because you can't really search people's houses for guns without destroying the fourth amendment, which is worth keeping. But if you're slowly reducing the number of guns in the country by confiscating and destroying them as they're found, and the supply is barely increasing because other industries (like drugs) offer a much more rewarding and less risky investment, then sooner or later most of the guns are going to be gone. I'm imagining SWAT teams with billowing red capes that say "GUN SQUAD". Considering how well the fourth is protected right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
withak posted:Yeah that kind of attitude is the kind of thing that should make you fail the psych evaluation that will be required for owning a gun. If it was up to me, people who wanted to own guns would not be allowed to own guns, and people who didn't want to own guns would be required to own them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2016 03:09
|
|
