|
twodot posted:Why does anyone think it's even remotely interesting to rank guns on a qualitative scale of "dangerous"? Like even if we had access to an objective measure of dangerous such that it would even be possible to conclude that argument, the next argument would just shift to where on the scale we should apply what restrictions. Winning a concession that gun X is indeed more than "slightly less dangerous" than gun Y achieves no reasonable goals. Because then we're talking about if the deputy was justified in going into the building or not and not the NRA.
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
twodot posted:Why does anyone think it's even remotely interesting to rank guns on a qualitative scale of "dangerous"? Like even if we had access to an objective measure of dangerous such that it would even be possible to conclude that argument, the next argument would just shift to where on the scale we should apply what restrictions. Winning a concession that gun X is indeed more than "slightly less dangerous" than gun Y achieves no reasonable goals. Hm yea good point, if BB guns are legal machine guns should be too, they're all the same
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Because then we're talking about if the deputy was justified in going into the building or not and not the NRA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
All things should have the exact same restrictions applied to them at all times because when you think about it, all matter is nothing but the same fundamental particles in different configurations with no objective definitions for anything really
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Cops are so brave when there's 5 of them clubbing an unarmed black man though. I just don't understand! There's no difference in effectiveness between 5 racist cops and 1 racist cop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Hm yea good point, if BB guns are legal machine guns should be too, they're all the same Amazon last year sold a bunch of airsoft full auto sears. Eventually somebody found out that the full auto sear was an identical replacement of the Glock 18's. As in purchasing it would be considered constructive possession and you'd get hit with a lot of NFA violation charges. 
Party Plane Jones fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Feb 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Because then we're talking about if the deputy was justified in going into the building or not and not the NRA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Is there really any difference between a musket with a fire rate of 15 minutes versus an M60 machine gun, gosh I just can't figure it out
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
Let's just take this argument to its logical conclusion and repeal laws against murder because a corpse has the same chemical composition as a living human so is anything really lost when you shoot someone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Wakko posted:If both sides of gunchat could come together in good faith and acknowledge
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Let's just take this argument to its logical conclusion and repeal laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:But I can't acknowledge that because I don't actually think it is true? I mean, sure, in a fantasy it's fun to think of an armed uprising to overthrow capitalism but what would actually happen is the state is so much better armed than it'd ever be possible to overthrow it in that manner. It's not 1776 anymore. They have tanks and planes. The People's Freedom Militia has taken the social security caves commander! Excellent, tell them to stop processing their 10 month queue at once!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:But I can't acknowledge that because I don't actually think it is true? I mean, sure, in a fantasy it's fun to think of an armed uprising to overthrow capitalism but what would actually happen is the state is so much better armed than it'd ever be possible to overthrow it in that manner. It's not 1776 anymore. They have tanks and planes. I have watched V for Vendetta 862 times, and I can assure you that if you do some neato gun tricks and release a viral video, the government will just give up and go home without a fight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I have watched V for Vendetta 862 times, and I can assure you that if you do some neato gun tricks and release a viral video, the government will just give up and go home without a fight. You don't even need the video. ***Only works when White.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
Wakko posted:If both sides of gunchat could come together in good faith and acknowledge What social good is this? If everyone was armed i wouldn't feel safer. We would all be an upset person away from a gun going off in this instance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:This but you just invite a bunch of rednecks to hang out under a tarp until the police just go home and nobody goes to jail. That didn't happen, one of them got shot and the rest surrendered to law enforcement without a fight or were quietly picked up later and they were all charged with crimes. They got off because of jury nullification, but in an actual civil war the government wouldn't bother with that, they'd suspend habeas corpus. E: Like most dumb right-wing poo poo, civil war fantasies seem to have a strong correlation with not understanding how things work outside the movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Few, if any people think that AR's are scary, it's just a way of infantilizing proponents of gun control. There's always a bunch of people who only go crazy about "That thing with the bump stocks!" and replace with whatever other gadget strapped on that time, there's legit a bunch of people scared of ARs more than anything else because it looks like something a generic actionman would carry, who only care about the issue as far as "Getting rid of that thing that did the crimes" and not actually working on gun violence as a whole. My post was talking about those kinds of people in the first bit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
An "actual civil war" lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
Has anyone who is not obviously and ridiculously biased even attempted to do a study on the effects of gun ownership and gun control on violence? My takeaway from every single discussion about guns is that no one has any idea what they are talking about but still can't stop flinging poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Mercrom posted:Has anyone who is not obviously and ridiculously biased even attempted to do a study on the effects of gun ownership and gun control on violence? My takeaway from every single discussion about guns is that no one has any idea what they are talking about but still can't stop flinging poo. Also welcome to the internet, where no argument ever ends and the Earth might be flat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
Mercrom posted:Has anyone who is not obviously and ridiculously biased even attempted to do a study on the effects of gun ownership and gun control on violence? My takeaway from every single discussion about guns is that no one has any idea what they are talking about but still can't stop flinging poo. For some reason theres no good data 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Your right, shooters just choose it because its so popular versus any actual combat specifics that make it an appealing combat weapon. That's why the DoD chose the M4 obviously, they just wanted to fit in with the crowd. CommieGIR posted:Uh, no. Not at all. And you know better, since there is no significant evidence to the contrary outside of questionable research groups and Conservative think tanks with NRA links: LOL, you complain about questionable research then post that nonsense, which still uses the "GUN DEATHS" slight-of-hand to lump in suicides. Here's what that data actually looks like if you're honest and use gun laws vs overall homicide rate instead of firearm homicides plus accidents plus suicides to puff up your numbers:  There isn't any correlation between homicide rate and strict gun laws. This is the fundamental dishonesty of your argument: you fixate on gun homicides plus suicides in hope of fooling people who aren't paying attention into thinking that access to firearms drives violent crime. Jethro posted:Violent Crime Jethro posted:Gun homicides only CommieGIR posted:At this point: We know it works in pretty much any form. Its kinda like people who decry Chicago gun regs as a "failure" while ignoring they largely fail because Indiana next door has very lax gun regs and there is no state border enforcement over importing firearms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Pistol caliber carbines is what I meant and you know that because your Mauser hasn't fit the definition of "carbine" for a century. Ban all semiautomatic rifles and pistols, the only guns you should be allowed to own are manually-reloaded rifles, shotguns and revolvers
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
And when some dirtbag commits a spree shooting with a pump action and a revolver, will you say, "we've done enough, we don't need more restrictions?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:And when some dirtbag commits a spree shooting with a pump action and a revolver, will you say, "we've done enough, we don't need more restrictions?" Depends on if the laws have been effective or not. The litmus test would probably be if you still have one or not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Ban all semiautomatic rifles and pistols, the only guns you should be allowed to own are manually-reloaded rifles, shotguns and revolvers
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:But I can't acknowledge that because I don't actually think it is true? I mean, sure, in a fantasy it's fun to think of an armed uprising to overthrow capitalism but what would actually happen is the state is so much better armed than it'd ever be possible to overthrow it in that manner. It's not 1776 anymore. They have tanks and planes. It doesn't need to be affirmed as perfect and unyielding truth, it just needs to be acknowledged as the limits to an otherwise maximalist political strategy. Acknowledge a right to individual and collective self-defense and there's room for broad agreement on limiting access to guns for those who are at high-risk of using them in a way that's dangerous to society. We can talk around in circles about statistics re: defensive gun use, crime rates, modern military strategy, etc, but at the end of day it doesn't matter. Here's two things that are observable in 20th century history: 1) The cosmopolitan, democratic governments that my family lived under in Europe had a bad decade and decided to round them up and murder them. 2) Despite having overwhelming military strength, the united states lost just about every war it decided to fight against an insurgency and is currently still in the process of losing on multiple fronts. You will not convince me in a period of enormous economic instability, as the far-right gains strength throughout the western world and in my own country is engaged in campaigns of assassination against people like me, that the correct thing to do is to disarm the civilian population. Fortunately, you don't have to. Merely acknowledge that you are willing to place some practical limits in the pursuit of gun control, and we can get on with the business of raising age requirements for rifle sales, modernizing the background check system and requiring it for all gun sales, adding those convicted of domestic abuse or animal cruelty to the prohibited purchasers list, and providing training and incentives for safe storage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Restrictions on gun, and especially handgun, ownership dramatically reduce suicides and gun crime. Don't think anyone here disputes either of those facts. Also yeah I know I just wish D&D had a slightly higher level of discourse than GBS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
Mercrom posted:Yes the fact that guns increase the rates of suicides a bit seems established. Also yes, I don't doubt there is a statistical correlation between the prevalence in guns in society and a prevalence in guns in any situation. That's not really enough for me to take this seriously as a political issue, much less a political issue that somehow seems to trump health care and global warming in America. Why is there no good gun statistics?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
The FBI and CDC collect statistics on firearm crimes and firearm deaths. What data do you think is missing? If your question is, "why aren't there statistics that support my argument", well... maybe it's time to re-think your assumptions. Rent-A-Cop posted:Restrictions on gun, and especially handgun, ownership dramatically reduce suicides and gun crime. Don't think anyone here disputes either of those facts. I also see why "gun crime" is a thing people should care about instead of overall crime, unless being killed with a gun is somehow worse than being beat or stabbed to death. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Feb 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Ban all semiautomatic rifles and pistols, the only guns you should be allowed to own are manually-reloaded rifles, shotguns and revolvers Then you have to ba semi auto shotguns as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Depends on if the laws have been effective or not. Are you willing to apply this "if there is even one occurrence, more restriction is necessary" rule to restricting any other social harm?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
Mercrom posted:Also yeah I know I just wish D&D had a slightly higher level of discourse than GBS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:And when some dirtbag commits a spree shooting with a pump action and a revolver, will you say, "we've done enough, we don't need more restrictions?" Well let me answer your question with a question: what new gun bans did Norway pass after Anders Breivik's attack? Dead Reckoning posted:The FBI and CDC collect statistics on firearm crimes and firearm deaths. If your question is, "why aren't there statistics that support my argument", well... maybe it's time to re-think your assumptions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickey_Amendment_(1996) We made it impossible to collect statistics that might support arguments we don't like.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Well let me answer your question with a question: what new gun bans did Norway pass after Anders Breivik's attack? The Dickey amendment bans advocacy. It isn't even the only anti-lobbying restriction on CDC funding: CDC guidelines prohibit advocating for regulating or banning any consumer product. So a researcher can publish a paper stating that there is a significant link between, say, smoking and heart disease, but can't publish a paper calling for greater restriction of tobacco sales. If you don't want to engage in advocacy and just want to do basic research, that seems like a big ole loophole, like the ones gun owners are apparently adept at finding. Congress hasn't appropriated any money earmarked for studying gun violence, because the CDC has previously given that money to researchers who engaged in poor research for the purposes of advocacy. And again, I would ask, what data specifically do you feel is missing that would enhance this conversation?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I want to know which pro-control goons advocating for restricting or eliminating ownership of self-loading firearms would consider the allegedly less deadly spree shootings that would occur if shooters only had access to manually cycled firearms to be acceptable and not grounds for further restriction of firearms ownership. Is getting shot by a pistol more, or less, painful than reading this sentence?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Why is there no good gun statistics? The GOP. (revolvers dropped off the crime statistics at an absurd rate after the mid-90s thanks to higher quality semi-autos being available for less)
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
Which statistics do you think we are missing?r.y.f.s.o. posted:Is getting shot by a pistol more, or less, painful than reading this sentence?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:That isn't relevant to my question. Unless one of you is a Norwegian gun control advocate. I want to know which pro-control goons advocating for restricting or eliminating ownership of self-loading firearms would consider the allegedly less deadly spree shootings that would occur if shooters only had access to manually cycled firearms to be acceptable and not grounds for further restriction of firearms ownership. Dead Reckoning posted:The Dickey amendment bans advocacy. It isn't even the only anti-lobbying restriction on CDC funding: CDC guidelines prohibit advocating for regulating or banning any consumer product. So a researcher can publish a paper stating that there is a significant link between, say, smoking and heart disease, but can't publish a paper calling for greater restriction of tobacco sales. If you don't want to engage in advocacy and just want to do basic research, that seems like a big ole loophole, like the ones gun owners are apparently adept at finding. Congress hasn't appropriated any money earmarked for studying gun violence, because the CDC has previously given that money to researchers who engaged in poor research for the purposes of advocacy. And again, I would ask, what data specifically do you feel is missing that would enhance this conversation? I'm sure it's just a coincidence that CDC research into gun violence dropped 96% after congress started cutting their budget by the exact amount the CDC tries to spend on research into gun violence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Depends on if the laws have been effective or not. The Cumbria shooting was pretty bad with just a break open shotgun and a bolt action 22.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:07
|
|
