Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Knives Amilli posted:

I love DeBlasio for the fact that the NYPD hates him with a burning passion.

Same.


Hell, I love DeBlasio because he made that old bitty that angry simply by having her misunderstand what he did.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
Also there are absolutely such things as belt-fed uppers and more reliable high cap mags than the surefire pancakes the shooter used.

Dude, not to poo poo on you but if you seriously wanted to confiscate any semiautomatic firearm, my only question is "how many people are you willing to have die in the process?"

That's literally the moment all those Bundy Ranch types are waiting for.

Putting semiautomatic weapons on the NFA wouldn't have stopped Vegas (and is also ignorant, just less so).

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

M_Gargantua posted:

So the solution you put forward can be summarized as "live with mass shootings just like we live with natural disaster deaths"

Banning semi autos also eliminates belt fed uppers.

Banning bump fire and other gimmicks would be the tinyest start

If you want to live in a free and democratic society then sometimes crazy assholes are going to go through every bullshit hoop you put in front of them in order to carry out whatever batshit murder plan they have.


Look at Anders Breivik. Dude spent years going through the process of legally getting weapons and then executed a plan no one knew about.


You want to solve gun crime? Work on solving poverty, on destigmatizing mental illness, and talk to your goddamned neighbors every week.

Banning poo poo is an ignorant, knee-jerk reaction with no actual thought put into the actual process. It's wishful thinking at its worst, because it's the sort of obvious stepping stone to full confiscation out there.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

M_Gargantua posted:

We can do all that in parallel. Fixing society is a difficult thing.

But what does that have to do with people needing to own deadly weapons that are particularly good at killing people? Yes maybe we can finally knee jerk into banning them, but why was there a need for civilian ownership in the first place.

Because technology advances and the AR platform is the perfect jack-of-all-trades rifle. Also, the 2A doesn't limit itself to "some weapons" (which is how you find gun owners that feel the entire NFA is unconstitutional).


Honestly dude I hate to say it but I'm glad people like you don't get to quickly affect national policy.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

M_Gargantua posted:

If ownership of semi automatic rifles is necessary for self defense against a destructive government then we should do what I (completely seriously) tell the CSPAM thread all the time, arm and train minority communities.

Gonna be hard pressed to get me to disagree with arming minority communities and training them for proper community defense. That's absolutely something that should be done.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Mr. Nice! posted:

You know all of the anti-ban arguments were identical in Australia yet they haven't had any shooting sprees remotely like before, right? There is no good reason for most people to have any type of weapon and I say this as a gun owner. A proper gun buyback and proper registration of hunting/farm weapons would stop the vast majority of the daily gun violence in America.

This isn't like we're reinventing the wheel here. Plenty of places around the world have went from armed populace to not and have been almost entirely free of gun related massacres since.

Did those countries have sections in their government's founding documents inherently protecting the existence of an armed populace?

Seriously curious.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

If this passes at least I'll have 300 days to get the gently caress out. I just bought an AR-15 and I'll be damned if I become a felon less than a year later because of it.

Sheer bloody-minded ignorance.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Syrian Lannister posted:

It's still a pain in the dick in the new millennium.

To be fair buying my Savage (EVIL BLACK RIFLE HIGH POWERED MILITARY FIREARM WITH HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES AND MANSTOPPER BULLETS) was a pretty simple affair; it started at the gun shop's online store so by the time it actually showed up from shipping the paperwork was done and the waiting period was over.

Had I been buying my first gun it would have taken much longer to get the FOID, etc.


Edit: five PMags showing up on Monday was weird for the roommates though

Professor Bling fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Oct 6, 2017

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Proud Christian Mom posted:

since we cant go back we should go forward.

mandatory firearms and training for minorities

Unironically agree.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

CommieGIR posted:

I love that you brought up the Wiemar Republic as the danger of Gun Registries, then ignored how the Nazis loosened gun control, and how personal firearms ownership did very little to actually stop them from seizing the weapons anyways and enacting a genocide, and the only major uprising was the Warsaw Uprising, which was conducted using seized military weapons, and was readily crushed.

So what was the point of ownership again?

Loosened gun control for *some* Germans. They specifically completely banned Jews from owning firearms (or having other rights accorded to Aryans). So what was the point of bans again?

:thunk:

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
Glad we agree that doing everything possible to curtail any legislative steps towards seizure while we can is a good thing.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

NUKES CURE NORKS posted:

59 people dying and 200 wounded is pretty high up on the list imho, so you're going to need to define human tragedy for me.

ending our forever war, ending the drug war, more stringent controls of police use of force


boom. three things that will do more to save lives than banning those evil black rifles that hold a bunch of gun food

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

NUKES CURE NORKS posted:

Yeah my bad.

59 people died? Well, we can't try to do anything about that because of this this and this.

That's not what I said. The options I laid out would absolutely reduce gun crime outside of statistical anomalies like the Vegas attacks, and lol if you think any ban on assault weapons would be anything other that 1) punishing law abiding owners of the nation's most popular rifle platform, 2) vague enough to be an actual infringement on the 2A rights of American citizens, or 3) so tightly written as to end up ineffective when confronted by anyone of means, like, say, the Vegas shooter.

VT was committed with pistols, one of which was a .22 caliber Walther. The Northern Illinois University shooting in which four students were killed was committed with a shotgun.

People that want to commit mass murder are going to find a way. Anders Breivik managed to jump through every legal hoop in Norway and still holds the world record for deadliest mass shooting.



So, yeah, when you suggest something actually effective at stopping this, then we'll talk. Bans aren't effective in any guise that doesn't punish lawful owners for a tragedy they had no hand in.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

M_Gargantua posted:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/914906488359079937

Twitter did a rundown of gun statistics. (I guess some of you aren't used to fancy modern stuff, so swipe left on mobile to flip pages)

Liberal conspiracy or falsified data!? Gun owners decide below.

Gun Violence Archive posted:

Gun Violence describes the results of all incidents of death or injury or threat with firearms without pejorative judgment within the definition. Violence is defined without intent or consequence as a consideration. To that end a shooting of a victim by a subject/suspect is considered gun violence as is a defensive use or an officer involved shooting. The act itself, no matter the reason is violent in nature.

Okay so these statistics aren't of gun crime, they're of gun use both lawful and unlawful. And they define "mass shooting" as four or more injured, not the government's definition of four or more (aside from shooter) killed. Looks like some massaged statistics and scare mongering.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

NUKES CURE NORKS posted:

Just because something is fun and most people don't break the law doesn't mean you should be granted ownership.

Just because a couple batshit dudes broke the law doesn't mean I should be denied ownership. Work on the cause, not a symptom. Otherwise the disease is still there.


Edit:

NUKES CURE NORKS posted:

The last ban we tried didn't work so we should never try it again.

Well, yeah. It obviously wasn't effective at doing anything. So why would it suddenly be effective now?

"Well this poo poo didn't work any of the other times we tried it but let's try it again" isn't the intelligent position to be coming from.

Professor Bling fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Oct 11, 2017

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

NUKES CURE NORKS posted:

The amount of gun violence in the US isn't perpetuated by a "couple" of anything.

And the majority of that violence is committed by pistols. Keep moving the goalposts if you want but you're trying to conflate two very different things here.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Mr. Nice! posted:

So you're saying ban pistols. Sounds good to me and i say this as a pistol owner.

I'm better off with that than rifles, yes (still against bans in any shape, but the pistol ban at least makes logical sense), but the problem there is the sheer amount of them floating around. How do you manage to get every pistol off the streets?


Edit: I've got an AR and a pistol and, honestly, probably wouldn't have bought the pistol if I'd bought the rifle first. Both stay locked up safely, but every time a dude gets shot near my house (gang-related activity, not a great neighborhood) I feel unsafe leaving the pistol home. I haven't carried it, because right now I don't have a CCL and I am mostly law abiding, but poo poo.

Professor Bling fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Oct 11, 2017

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Shhh, no, see, the problem is guns, not the actual sources of violence


Yep, it's the shooty tubes entirely and without shooty tubes everything would be rainbows and unicorns

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

CommieGIR posted:

Got it. Voter suppression is the same as taking guns from poors :qq:


glad we agree they're both targeted restrictions of constitutional rights levied against minorities and the poor by the rich and the white

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Kawasaki Nun posted:

Poors have already had their gun rights seized through felon exclusion for quite some time.

also true but then again who would honestly argue the us justice system isn't systemically racist and classist

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

brand engager posted:

lmao this is basically a fuckin command&conquer story cutscene

eh the joke i had here fell flat but she isn't even good enough for a c&c cutscene

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Sq1Nr58hM

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
hot take: being the kind of sick gently caress that voluntarily wears a badge for more than three years should get you summarily executed


realtalk: cops are universally poo poo, even if the people who are cops aren't all poo poo people. all cops are truly bastards

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
I guess my only question for VV is how all those boots taste.

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN
.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

45 ACP CURES NAZIS posted:

for a bitchmade fucker that was never actually in combat vv sure is a bloodthirsty internet hardass film major

p sure he's just upset all the film school girls hated him

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Professor Bling
Nov 12, 2008

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Motherfucker posted:

hi long time lurker first time poster, why do you guys shoot dogs all the time?

Because, just like anyrhing else that hates dogs, cops are evil

Also dog shooters aren't people so I'm assuming that a cop's humanity goes away when the uniform is put on and *maybe* comes back when they're off-duty

  • Locked thread