Gun control

America can only change if it becomes a number of separate countries...
It's just too big to control and half the population still has a wild west mentality. Plus a flag obsession. And a Constitution obsession. Personally I think the Founding Fathers were dyslexic and just wanted to ensure that people had the right to stay cool in summer by wearing sleeveless tops....
 
Livvie said:
America can only change if it becomes a number of separate countries...
It's just too big to control and half the population still has a wild west mentality. Plus a flag obsession. And a Constitution obsession. Personally I think the Founding Fathers were dyslexic and just wanted to ensure that people had the right to stay cool in summer by wearing sleeveless tops....
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Livvie
Livvie said:
America can only change if it becomes a number of separate countries...
It's just too big to control and half the population still has a wild west mentality. Plus a flag obsession. And a Constitution obsession. Personally I think the Founding Fathers were dyslexic and just wanted to ensure that people had the right to stay cool in summer by wearing sleeveless tops....
Click to expand...
Just ban them, it’s that simple. The response that ‘it would take years’ isn’t a reason not to.

Yeah it would take years to rid the country of firearms, which only serves to prove the depth of the problem.

Their senate / court system makes it impossible to change amendments easily, so they follow laws that are basically English common law but 100’s of years old, that’s the root of the issue. Plus of course there are millions of idiots who want to own a gun, feck knows why, compensates for the lack of a d*ck one assumes.
 
RUCK4444 said:
Just ban them, it’s that simple. The response that ‘it would take years’ isn’t a reason not to.

Yeah it would take years to rid the country of firearms, which only serves to prove the depth of the problem.

Their senate / court system makes it impossible to change amendments easily, so they follow laws that are basically English common law but 100’s of years old, that’s the root of the issue. Plus of course there are millions of idiots who want to own a gun, feck knows why, compensates for the lack of a d*ck one assumes.
Click to expand...
No will to ban them.

You can’t discount how strongly people in this country take the myth of gun ownership as being a ‘god given right.’
 
horsechoker said:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-by-three-year-old-brother-houston-police-say

Baby dies in ‘tragic’ shooting by three-year-old brother, Houston police say
  • Eight-month-old dies in hospital after shooting at apartment
  • Police urge gun owners to lock up firearms: ‘This is tragic event’
If only the family had another gun to shoot the 3 year old, this wouldn't have happened.
Click to expand...
Parents are suing the maternity hospital for not training the baby in firearms.
 
calodo2003 said:
No will to ban them.

You can’t discount how strongly people in this country take the myth of gun ownership as being a ‘god given right.’
Click to expand...
This is what is the most baffling thing. How can so many people still want guns on the street when day after day so many are killed as a result?

This is the problem, it should be taken away from the will of people, external force to change the legislation.

Something needs to supersede the current structure so that it’s taken out of people’s hands. Basic human rights laws or something, if people can’t help themselves sometimes you need to herd the cattle against their will.
 
RUCK4444 said:
This is what is the most baffling thing. How can so many people still want guns on the street when day after day so many are killed as a result?

This is the problem, it should be taken away from the will of people, external force to change the legislation.

Something needs to supersede the current structure so that it’s taken out of people’s hands. Basic human rights laws or something, if people can’t help themselves sometimes you need to herd the cattle against their will.
Click to expand...
Those people focus solely on murders when gun violence is the issue. They claim that since some murders have been stopped by others with guns, that means guns should obviously be legal & even more proliferated throughout the public.

They also rail against any restrictions on the 2A & state that it ‘shall not be infringed upon,’ when in reality, it has been infringed upon, is currently, & will always be. The assault weapons ban reduced murder by guns rather precipitously in the 90s until the number rose again due to deaths through handgun use. They then will admit to restrictions occurring, but that it obviously didn’t do anything.

They rarely, if ever, discuss the non-mass shootings, the gun violence that can occur from guns just being present in crime. Or self harm.

See the feedback loop in which these mental deficients reside? This loop also controls roughly 60% of politicians.

It’s a Gordian knot, virtually intractable. They thump the massively flawed constitution / BoR, that is their out card.

Sad to say, but ain’t nothing going to change.
 
RUCK4444 said:
Just ban them, it’s that simple.
Click to expand...

There will be absolute murder if they ever try to do that. Right now would be the absolute worst time considering many of those same people are losing their absolute shit about vaccine passports and the long term implications of them.
 
The only way to stop a bad 3 year old with a gun is a good 3 year old with a gun.
 
RUCK4444 said:
This is what is the most baffling thing. How can so many people still want guns on the street when day after day so many are killed as a result?

This is the problem, it should be taken away from the will of people, external force to change the legislation.

Something needs to supersede the current structure so that it’s taken out of people’s hands. Basic human rights laws or something, if people can’t help themselves sometimes you need to herd the cattle against their will.
Click to expand...

That would take politicians who cared more about people than being re-elected, which isn’t going to happen in America or anywhere else for that matter. And of course politicians who actually see how fecking insane it is to have a civilian population armed to the teeth.
 
calodo2003 said:
Those people focus solely on murders when gun violence is the issue. They claim that since some murders have been stopped by others with guns, that means guns should obviously be legal & even more proliferated throughout the public.

They also rail against any restrictions on the 2A & state that it ‘shall not be infringed upon,’ when in reality, it has been infringed upon, is currently, & will always be. The assault weapons ban reduced murder by guns rather precipitously in the 90s until the number rose again due to deaths through handgun use. They then will admit to restrictions occurring, but that it obviously didn’t do anything.

They rarely, if ever, discuss the non-mass shootings, the gun violence that can occur from guns just being present in crime. Or self harm.

See the feedback loop in which these mental deficients reside? This loop also controls roughly 60% of politicians.

It’s a Gordian knot, virtually intractable. They thump the massively flawed constitution / BoR, that is their out card.

Sad to say, but ain’t nothing going to change.
Click to expand...
It’s mental. The clearest demonstration of how gun possession also heightens the likelihood of violence in almost any situation is clear when you view how police and the public interact in online videos.

What can be a very basic interaction between an unarmed police officer in for example the UK, is changed vastly in comparison when you observe the same sort of interaction in the US. Cops screaming and yelling with guns drawn over almost anything, for fear of course, that the member of the public may have a firearm on them.

It makes it an incredibly hard job for police officers and only makes matters worse when you factor in a layer of endemic racism. Causing a permanent divide and hatred towards police.

I can’t imagine the difference it must make for a police officer to know encountering guns on the street is relatively rare and 99.9% of encounters do not involve firearms - compared to an officer in the US knowing its very possible that anybody you encounter is armed with a gun. It inevitably creates a silent war, rumbling under the surface, skewing the interaction and setting the tone of every encounter.
 
RUCK4444 said:
It’s mental. The clearest demonstration of how gun possession also heightens the likelihood of violence in almost any situation is clear when you view how police and the public interact in online videos.

What can be a very basic interaction between an unarmed police officer in for example the UK, is changed vastly in comparison when you observe the same sort of interaction in the US. Cops screaming and yelling with guns drawn over almost anything, for fear of course, that the member of the public may have a firearm on them.

It makes it an incredibly hard job for police officers and only makes matters worse when you factor in a layer of endemic racism.

I can’t imagine the difference it must make for a police officer to know encountering guns on the street is relatively rare and 99.9% of encounters do not involve firearms - compared to an officer in the US knowing its very possible that anybody you encounter is armed with a gun. It inevitably creates a silent war, rumbling under the surface, skewing the interaction and setting the tone of every encounter.
Click to expand...
Not just encounters with LE, basic daily encounters. I related a personal situation in the Atlanta shooting thread where someone shot five or six rounds from a handgun no further than 100 feet from my ground level bedroom. I hear gun shots every other night, heard at least a half dozen just 18 hours ago. And I am in a ‘gentrified’ part of a downtown, not that it makes any difference.
 
The situation in the US is nuts and a long way from sanity but for fecks sake stop leaving loaded pistols lying around if there are children in your house.
 
Valar Morghulis said:
There will be absolute murder if they ever try to do that. Right now would be the absolute worst time considering many of those same people are losing their absolute shit about vaccine passports and the long term implications of them.
Click to expand...

then give them the all out war they want. Stop coddling lunatics.
 
calodo2003 said:
Not just encounters with LE, basic daily encounters. I related a personal situation in the Atlanta shooting thread where someone shot five or six rounds from a handgun no further than 100 feet from my ground level bedroom. I hear gun shots every other night, heard at least a half dozen just 18 hours ago. And I am in a ‘gentrified’ part of a downtown, not that it makes any difference.
Click to expand...
Yeah sorry I did mean in a general sense, using LE as an example we all tend to see of it.

Of course it must affect so many day to day interactions and quality of life for a massive amount of people. This is why I find it so mind bending that the bulk of the country would still vote to keep the population armed.

There’s just no downside to a ban.
 
calodo2003 said:
It should be that any gun owner is held liable for any crime or incident occurs while that person still owns the gun.
Click to expand...

I'm always amazed that the gun owners escape charges in these situations. Slap them with a felony and a prohibition order, even if the sentence is suspended, so the dumb cnuts cant own guns legally anymore.
 
Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær said:
I'm always amazed that the gun owners escape charges in these situations. Slap them with a felony and a prohibition order, even if the sentence is suspended, so the dumb cnuts cant own guns legally anymore.
Click to expand...
Yep. We might not be able to keep them out of mental deficients’ hands at the beginning of the equation, but we need to make sure any issue with the gun during the ownership of it comes back harshly on the owner.
 
Least till we can ban firearms ammo and the weapons should be in two completely separate safes.
 
RUCK4444 said:
Yeah sorry I did mean in a general sense, using LE as an example we all tend to see of it.

Of course it must affect so many day to day interactions and quality of life for a massive amount of people. This is why I find it so mind bending that the bulk of the country would still vote to keep the population armed.

There’s just no downside to a ban.
Click to expand...


Reasonable gun control, background checks and certain people being barred from gun ownership is possible. A ban is not.

Part of the issue here is minorities would never support a ban because they don't feel the police will adequately or fairly protect them. Until massive changes are made with how criminal justice a "ban on guns" is a nonstarter and will fire up the paranoid right wingers far more than it will motivate the left or democrats.

I understand how strange the culture must seem to Europeans but suggestions like "just ban the guns" is not a viable solution.

Meaningful gun control, closing the gun show loopholes and barring people like domestic violence offenders and certain individuals with certain mental health problems is a realistic step.
 
RUCK4444 said:
This is what is the most baffling thing. How can so many people still want guns on the street when day after day so many are killed as a result?
Click to expand...
The country runs on individualism. And a weird interpretation of freedom. Pretty much all people have this ingrained into their heads for years. It works in many scenarios. And works against the good in many cases.
 
If a seminal moment in US history like the Sandy Hook massacre is not even going to make a dent in the US psyche, nothing will. They can't even get their head around a decent healthcare system. That country is fecked.
 
I’ve probably said this before, but I’m still surprised there has never been legislation severely regulating ammunition sales. The Constitution says nothing about bullets.
 
Carolina Red said:
I’ve probably said this before, but I’m still surprised there has never been legislation severely regulating ammunition sales. The Constitution says nothing about bullets.
Click to expand...

It would seem like a logical place to start. If there are over 300m firearms in this country then who knows how many hundreds of billions of rounds there are floating around.
 
Raoul said:
It would seem like a logical place to start. If there are over 300m firearms in this country then who knows how many hundreds of billions of rounds there are floating around.
Click to expand...
With, like guns, a vast majority of those rounds being owned by a very very small minority of gun collectors / enthusiasts.
 
Carolina Red said:
With, like guns, a vast majority of those rounds being owned by a very very small minority of gun collectors / enthusiasts.
Click to expand...

I think the biggest hurdle something like ammo control legislation would encounter, would be similar to what gun control itself would run into, which is how to remove that many units from society. A large number of people would probably not be interested in participating in government buyback plans (or similar) and would instead opt to horde as much as possible at home. You would then have to embark on a giant law enforcement campaign to implement the law, which there is no political appetite for at the moment imo. Best case scenario would be an executive order to restrict ammo sales, although i have my doubts Biden would do that.
 
RedDevil@84 said:
The country runs on individualism. And a weird interpretation of freedom. Pretty much all people have this ingrained into their heads for years. It works in many scenarios. And works against the good in many cases.
Click to expand...
Toss in the exceptionalism to play right into our narcissism, you have America.
 
Raoul said:
I think the biggest hurdle something like ammo control legislation would encounter, would be similar to what gun control itself would run into, which is how to remove that many units from society. A large number of people would probably not be interested in participating in government buyback plans (or similar) and would instead opt to horde as much as possible at home. You would then have to embark on a giant law enforcement campaign to implement the law, which there is no political appetite for at the moment imo. Best case scenario would be an executive order to restrict ammo sales, although i have my doubts Biden would do that.
Click to expand...
It would definitely be a big undertaking, but one that doesn’t have a constitutional argument against it that actual guns have.
 
Dante said:
Gun control is generally excellent in every country that matters. This thread should be closed.
Click to expand...
Which countries don't matter then?

Go ahead name them.

giphy.gif
 
Raoul said:
I think the biggest hurdle something like ammo control legislation would encounter, would be similar to what gun control itself would run into, which is how to remove that many units from society. A large number of people would probably not be interested in participating in government buyback plans (or similar) and would instead opt to horde as much as possible at home. You would then have to embark on a giant law enforcement campaign to implement the law, which there is no political appetite for at the moment imo. Best case scenario would be an executive order to restrict ammo sales, although i have my doubts Biden would do that.
Click to expand...

Even if they can’t get a hold of the ones already in circulation, surely it’s at least a start to control future accumulation? It’s better than nothing, no? The ammo already in circulation is bound to run out at some point, and with proper control, not be able to be replenished at an adequate rate.
 
Cloud7 said:
Even if they can’t get a hold of the ones already in circulation, surely it’s at least a start to control future accumulation? It’s better than nothing, no? The ammo already in circulation is bound to run out at some point, and with proper control, not be able to be replenished at an adequate rate.
Click to expand...
The slippery slope fever dream of the ammosexual gun humpers is zero sum. They see no validity in reducing gun violence because you can’t completely eliminate it.
 
Cloud7 said:
Even if they can’t get a hold of the ones already in circulation, surely it’s at least a start to control future accumulation? It’s better than nothing, no? The ammo already in circulation is bound to run out at some point, and with proper control, not be able to be replenished at an adequate rate.
Click to expand...
I fully agree, but how do you ensure it all carries on for long enough to have an effect? What if the next person in office just turns things on its head. So many people would vote for someone that promises that.
 
VeevaVee said:
I fully agree, but how do you ensure it all carries on for long enough to have an effect? What if the next person in office just turns things on its head. So many people would vote for someone that promises that.
Click to expand...

Well, what’s the alternative then? Surely doing something is better than doing nothing at all because the something might get overturned in the future. Right now they’re doing nothing and we can all see the fruits of it.
 
Ammo should be taxed as highly as cigarettes and alcohol. Win-win situation although many are able to make their own and making that illegal would be impossible.
 
Grinner said:
Tell me what they are. I don't know anything about making ammo.

Are you allowed to make your own depleted uranium shells?
Click to expand...

:lol: the only thing you couldn't tax is if people wanted to smelt lead and cast their own bullets. Everything else needs to be purchased. Brass cases, primers, smokeless powder and bullets. Most people prefer copper jacketed bullets to lead as they shoot cleaner.
 
Cloud7 said:
Well, what’s the alternative then? Surely doing something is better than doing nothing at all because the something might get overturned in the future. Right now they’re doing nothing and we can all see the fruits of it.
Click to expand...

Realistically, the only way to do something is to find a set of gun control measures that can gain Congressional support and will be enshrined in law (closing gun show loophole, increasing universal background checks, barring certain criminal offenders from ever owning guns, and raising taxes on certain products like ammunition as mention, as well as increasing penalties for importing guns from other states).

Trying to "ban guns" is basically the same as doing nothing since it would never pass and an executive order would just create a massive black market that wouldn't be enforced in the current environment and simply overturned with the next Republican. Plus it would fire up the right-winger far more than the Democrat base.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.