Gun Control

[Whatdidyousay?]

You are gravely confused if you believe empty legislation will prevent a criminal from obtaining or re-obtaining a firearm. The law of the land has been dissolved into the hands of oligarchs, and now we are only left with the Law of God. Nobody actually cares if Mr. 'Scary Weirdo' has a gun or not. Nobody is checking on Mr. 'Scary Weirdo' daily to make sure that he is unarmed and has not obtained a gun from secondary sources unless Mr. Scary Weirdo is a person of particular interest to the oligarchs.

You are asking for a pig to fly. Slaughter the pig and get an eagle.

Agreed. Let the Americans deal with their own shit. If they are happy with monthly school shootings in not going to bitch.

 

[The Demon]

Posting this here because I don't want to shit up the Florida school shooter thread even more with gun control stuff.



Anyone care to answer these questions?

I'd say that if they're prone to violence or have show tendencies to have the same sort of tendencies of a school shooter, bar them from buying any firearms. it would require a teacher plus evidence towards the factor in a court of law to enforce it. before that though, we should require that people ID purchasers of guns. same thing with alcohol, no ID, no purchase. anyone who doesn't keep a record of sales or sells to people regardless of whether they have an ID or not will be breaking the law. this should be extended to gun shows and those quick sales.

then, after he gets reported, get him a therapist. depending on how much money the family has, the government will essentially "insure" him for all mental health services like evaluations, therapy, and meds. Essentially just help him through that tough time and once he's way better than he was before, deemed mentally healthy and okay, then you can let him buy guns again. Then, keep him insured, just in case.

 

[Whatdidyousay?]

I'd say that if they're prone to violence or have show tendencies to have the same sort of tendencies of a school shooter, bar them from buying any firearms. it would require a teacher plus evidence towards the factor in a court of law to enforce it. before that though, we should require that people ID purchasers of guns. same thing with alcohol, no ID, no purchase. anyone who doesn't keep a record of sales or sells to people regardless of whether they have an ID or not will be breaking the law. this should be extended to gun shows and those quick sales.

then, after he gets reported, get him a therapist. depending on how much money the family has, the government will essentially "insure" him for all mental health services like evaluations, therapy, and meds. Essentially just help him through that tough time and once he's way better than he was before, deemed mentally healthy and okay, then you can let him buy guns again. Then, keep him insured, just in case.

Meh. Give him a gun. Let him go wild. 2nd amendment rights dictate what they are allowed. More the merrier.

 

[The Demon]

Meh. Give him a gun. Let him go wild. 2nd amendment rights dictate what they are allowed. More the merrier.

we get it, you're european

 

[Dirt McGirt]

Meh. Give him a gun. Let him go wild. 2nd amendment rights dictate what they are allowed. More the merrier.

Don't cut yourself on all your edge fam

 

[Daughter of Cernunnos]

Gun rights are something I agree with as a socialist, stance on gun rights is one easy way to tell a liberal organization from a leftist one. I think the idea in the US constitution of citizens having a right to self defense and to protection against a totalitarian government is a good one. Marx said gun control should be fought at all costs. Gun control is a modern Anglo Saxon disease that empowers thugs and break in crimes. It seems very reactionary to me that these libtards think the state should have a monopoly on force.

Just ban people with personality disorders from having guns. There has to be something wrong with mass shooters. Screen for sociopaths and whatnot in schools just like they watch the kids for signs of learning disabilities and retardation and test them as needed. Develop some effective treatment for PDs and programs that discourage at risk youth from committing these atrocities.

Not all mental illnesses lead to the sufferers being more violent so mentally ill people without personality disorders should still have gun rights. There should not be a blanket gun ban for all the mentally ill though many Democrats would probably support such laws even though true progressives would know that most mental illnesses do not make the sufferers violent and they are even more likely to be victims of violence. Ableist much?!

 

[ColtWalker1847]

I'd say that if they're prone to violence or have show tendencies to have the same sort of tendencies of a school shooter, bar them from buying any firearms. it would require a teacher plus evidence towards the factor in a court of law to enforce it. before that though, we should require that people ID purchasers of guns. same thing with alcohol, no ID, no purchase. anyone who doesn't keep a record of sales or sells to people regardless of whether they have an ID or not will be breaking the law. this should be extended to gun shows and those quick sales.

then, after he gets reported, get him a therapist. depending on how much money the family has, the government will essentially "insure" him for all mental health services like evaluations, therapy, and meds. Essentially just help him through that tough time and once he's way better than he was before, deemed mentally healthy and okay, then you can let him buy guns again. Then, keep him insured, just in case.

There's a little bit of actionable legislation there. You didn't fall for my trap where I called out all the shit that is currently on the books with the Brady Bill. Props to you.

The only snags I see are the regs on IDs. Private purchase (the mis-labeled "gun show loophole", gun shows are like boat shows it's dealers selling there not private parties) is extremely tough to regulate. Guns don't have date codes stamped on them so you can't tell who bought what from who where. If I want to sell a rifle to my neighbor on the downlow without a background check, they can't really do shit. The neighbor can just say he bought it before the ban and that's that.

This is currently the norm in places that adopted FFL transfer regulations for all purchases after Newtown. It did nothing except inconvenience legal buyers and enlarge the market for illegal transfers where people with questionable records operate adding to the burden of law enforcement who would rather be apprehending gangbangers rather than guys trading shotguns for skeet shooting.

Also, there is no national registry. Who has what is unknown except in certain jurisdictions where it is required locally and even then they only know what is owned legally. What they have illegally is also unknown. Attempting to keep track of it all by starting one is a huge can of worms as far as anything actionable. Plus, a lot of people just aren't going to. I have guns that shipped with instruction manuals on how to cache them (ah, the 90's AWB panic. how I remember thee). This shit is going to be around forever. Parts and plans abound. People who want them will get them. Here's a guy making an AR out of PBR cans in his garage.

That is the hard way, btw. 80% lowers are $50 bucks and with a set of jigs and a drill are untraceable fully functioning firearms that ship through the mail. Then you have the cap-and-ball stuff that is convertible to cartridge. C&R firearms. And a whole bunch of other shit.

But, yeah, go after those "gun shows" where guys swap stuff in a parking lot. Make them show ID. That'll solve the problem.

 

[ColtWalker1847]

Ok, so to open up discussion let's start with the 2nd.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That's nice. So what did they mean? Gun control people say "well regulated". Gun nuts say "shall not be infringed".

Well, here's what it actually means. Federalist Papers No. 29.

tl;dr "Well regulated" means the training and equipment to be a credible military force. "Shall not be infringed" means shall not be infringed by the federal government because the states have the sole power to regulate the militia.

It's the states rights argument but specifically about guns, militia, and how they relate to the national army and the federal government. If your state decides you don't need a gun, well you are SOL. If your state says "why the fuck not you are part of the unorganized militia buy all the guns you want", that's cool too.

The point is that the federal government doesn't get a say here. It's up to the states because they are the ones who regulate the militia.

Note, most all federal regs only fly because of weaseling around the clearly enumerated constitutional limitations. The NFA machine gun stuff is very specifically a tax thing, not a regulating militia thing.

 

[Burgers in the ass]

I'm very split when it comes to these arguements
Many people argue for gun control because they kill people, but so do cars, knives and fists, should we ban those?
Likewise people argue against it because criminals wouldn't follow the laws set in place, yet they don't follow the laws against murder and rape, should make those legal?
All very confusing to me.

 

[Rio]

Many people argue for gun control because they kill people, but so do cars, knives and fists, should we ban those?

I don't really want to get into a big debate here, but I just wanted to address this point, because I've seen it a lot but I don't really understand the reasoning behind it. There's two reasons why guns are different from the other things you mentioned.
1. the intent guns were made to serve. Guns serve a single purpose: to kill things. That's the reason behind their existence. Beyond their purpose as a weapon to be used against other living things, they have no real use except for as a hobby. Rifles like the one most proposed gun legislation wants to ban exist primarily to be used against people. Sure, some hunters use them for things like varmint control, but even when they go hunting for food they generally tend to pick different weapons as far as I know. Cars and knives were both primarily invented as utility tools.
2. Efficiency. Picture this. You're walking through a busy street with, say another 100 people there. Someone like 50 meters away suddenly pulls out a weapon and starts killing people. What do you think would pose a bigger threat to you? If they pulled out a knife and started stabbing people one by one? Or if they pulled out a gun and started shooting wildly at everyone in their surroundings? The vegas shooter killed 50 people in 10 minutes from a position where nobody could even come close to him to stop him during that time. You could argue that the 2016 attack on Nice prove that cars can be very dangerous as well, and you'd have a pretty good point, but keep in mind that it's significantly harder to legally get the right to drive a car in America than it is to purchase and legally own a gun in many states.

 

[Duke Nukem]

I don't really want to get into a big debate here, but I just wanted to address this point, because I've seen it a lot but I don't really understand the reasoning behind it. There's two reasons why guns are different from the other things you mentioned.
1. the intent guns were made to serve. Guns serve a single purpose: to kill things. That's the reason behind their existence. Beyond their purpose as a weapon to be used against other living things, they have no real use except for as a hobby. Rifles like the one most proposed gun legislation wants to ban exist primarily to be used against people. Sure, some hunters use them for things like varmint control, but even when they go hunting for food they generally tend to pick different weapons as far as I know. Cars and knives were both primarily invented as utility tools.
2. Efficiency. Picture this. You're walking through a busy street with, say another 100 people there. Someone like 50 meters away suddenly pulls out a weapon and starts killing people. What do you think would pose a bigger threat to you? If they pulled out a knife and started stabbing people one by one? Or if they pulled out a gun and started shooting wildly at everyone in their surroundings? The vegas shooter killed 50 people in 10 minutes from a position where nobody could even come close to him to stop him during that time. You could argue that the 2016 attack on Nice prove that cars can be very dangerous as well, and you'd have a pretty good point, but keep in mind that it's significantly harder to legally get the right to drive a car in America than it is to purchase and legally own a gun in many states.

And see all the good that licensing drivers does with all the idiots on the road. What makes you think it's going to be any more effective if we do the same things with firearms?

If you really want some serious gun control then amend the constitution again. Good luck with that.

Another thing I see is that everyone is all about banning guns but I don't hear a peep about alcohol, which is far, far more destructive in the long run. You know what? Maybe we should try banning it, that might actually work!

 

[The Demon]

There's a little bit of actionable legislation there. You didn't fall for my trap where I called out all the shit that is currently on the books with the Brady Bill. Props to you.

The only snags I see are the regs on IDs. Private purchase (the mis-labeled "gun show loophole", gun shows are like boat shows it's dealers selling there not private parties) is extremely tough to regulate. Guns don't have date codes stamped on them so you can't tell who bought what from who where. If I want to sell a rifle to my neighbor on the downlow without a background check, they can't really do shit. The neighbor can just say he bought it before the ban and that's that.

This is currently the norm in places that adopted FFL transfer regulations for all purchases after Newtown. It did nothing except inconvenience legal buyers and enlarge the market for illegal transfers where people with questionable records operate adding to the burden of law enforcement who would rather be apprehending gangbangers rather than guys trading shotguns for skeet shooting.

Also, there is no national registry. Who has what is unknown except in certain jurisdictions where it is required locally and even then they only know what is owned legally. What they have illegally is also unknown. Attempting to keep track of it all by starting one is a huge can of worms as far as anything actionable. Plus, a lot of people just aren't going to. I have guns that shipped with instruction manuals on how to cache them (ah, the 90's AWB panic. how I remember thee). This shit is going to be around forever. Parts and plans abound. People who want them will get them. Here's a guy making an AR out of PBR cans in his garage.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=on1d9Bz34bU
That is the hard way, btw. 80% lowers are $50 bucks and with a set of jigs and a drill are untraceable fully functioning firearms that ship through the mail. Then you have the cap-and-ball stuff that is convertible to cartridge. C&R firearms. And a whole bunch of other shit.

But, yeah, go after those "gun shows" where guys swap stuff in a parking lot. Make them show ID. That'll solve the problem.

well fuck it. i guess therapy is good enough

and on top of that, hire guards to look after the school just in case

edit: god that's such a cool video

edit edit: honestly, i think a better argument for this is 3D printing

 

[Crunchy Leaf]

i'm in favor of making it harder for the violently mentally ill to buy guns

 

[Duke Nukem]

well fuck it. i guess therapy is good enough

and on top of that, hire guards to look after the school just in case

edit: god that's such a cool video

edit edit: honestly, i think a better argument for this is 3D printing

It's funny how all the politicians and celebrities who want guns banned will hire armed guards for themselves while spouting their hypocritical bullshit.

3D printing ain't shit compared to CNC machining and technical knowledge. Even if you could sign a piece of paper to make all guns illegal and/or magically disappear, illicit machine shops would begin to make copies. People build AK clones in caves after all.

 

[The Demon]

It's funny how all the politicians and celebrities who want guns banned will hire armed guards for themselves while spouting their hypocritical bullshit.

3D printing ain't shit compared to CNC machining and technical knowledge. Even if you could sign a piece of paper to make all guns illegal and/or magically disappear, illicit machine shops would begin to make copies. People build AK clones in caves after all.

honestly, i think 3D printing guns is the future

 

[Duke Nukem]

honestly, i think 3D printing guns is the future

Assuming people know anything about metallurgy and 3D printers are capable of it, I'm sure it would grow, being out of the reach of government itself. Unless .gov imposes a totalitarian state and bans chemistry, metallurgy, and machining...who knows, leftists are total control freaks whose micropenises get hard at the thought of telling people how to think and act and stuff.

 

[Maxliam]

Yeah that is the thing. Even though he shot people, he wouldn't need a gun if he could improvise with something else like a blade or even 500 pounds of oncoming metal on wheels.

That has been happening in Europe a lot. Guy steals truck, runs over a bunch of people. If you are determined to kill a lot of people, you will find a way. Look at that Japanese cult back in the 90's. Used sarin gas in their subway system. You can't stop crazy with laws.

Guys, guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people.

Guns don't kill people, the government does!

Then again, the pro-gun people can be real creepy. Guns are tools that are used to kill and they are not toys or accessories to make you look tough (nor are they the answer to all of society's problems). If you're someone who has to parade an automatic or higher-powered weapon in public, you seem like an insecure attention whore to me. In the end, these guys are their own worst enemies for their cause (especially if they brag about "second amendment remedies") since they're scaring people off.

I am a proud ammosexual and I agree that lugging a rifle around in public is cringey. I don't personally like open carry. I believe in conceal carrying a pistol if you're serious about self defense.

Posting this here because I don't want to shit up the Florida school shooter thread even more with gun control stuff.



Anyone care to answer these questions?

I think we need to have better security at places that are soft targets. The shooters never hit a gun show or a range for obvious reasons. They'd get lit up. It's like idiots who try to rob gun stores and get shot by people behind the counter who are all armed.

Also the news should stop showcasing these idiots. They do this for infamy. They're all losers who don't get any attention and this is their chance to feel big. If we stopped identifying them and even talking about them instead just going "Suspect X shot them" and leave it at that, they'd see they won't get famous. Problem is I don't think there should be a law because I strongly believe in the 1st amendment. I just think if the news honestly meant their self-righteous indignation to these deaths, they'd not broadcast the asshole's name. But it's really "if it bleeds, it leads!" mentality.

we get it, you're european

But he didn't yell aloha snackbar, how can you tell?

I don't really want to get into a big debate here, but I just wanted to address this point, because I've seen it a lot but I don't really understand the reasoning behind it. There's two reasons why guns are different from the other things you mentioned.
1. the intent guns were made to serve. Guns serve a single purpose: to kill things. That's the reason behind their existence. Beyond their purpose as a weapon to be used against other living things, they have no real use except for as a hobby. Rifles like the one most proposed gun legislation wants to ban exist primarily to be used against people. Sure, some hunters use them for things like varmint control, but even when they go hunting for food they generally tend to pick different weapons as far as I know. Cars and knives were both primarily invented as utility tools.
2. Efficiency. Picture this. You're walking through a busy street with, say another 100 people there. Someone like 50 meters away suddenly pulls out a weapon and starts killing people. What do you think would pose a bigger threat to you? If they pulled out a knife and started stabbing people one by one? Or if they pulled out a gun and started shooting wildly at everyone in their surroundings? The vegas shooter killed 50 people in 10 minutes from a position where nobody could even come close to him to stop him during that time. You could argue that the 2016 attack on Nice prove that cars can be very dangerous as well, and you'd have a pretty good point, but keep in mind that it's significantly harder to legally get the right to drive a car in America than it is to purchase and legally own a gun in many states.

A lot of those deaths in Vegas were from tramplings by people fleeing the gun fire. Honestly you should be more worried about someone pulling another Charles Whitman where they take careful aimed shots with a bolt-action rifle. Almost every shot he took was a hit. Guy was prepared for war. Had a ton of other guns including a sawed off (violating the NFA) shotgun, a bunch of pistols, food, knives, water, an M1 Carbine and all kinds of gear.

One point I'd like to make about cars. You can buy one from a private seller without needing a license. Hell you can physically drive it on the road illegally. Do we now prevent people from selling cars privately? Because they have to have faith in the person buying it is going to file the title for it.

It's funny how all the politicians and celebrities who want guns banned will hire armed guards for themselves while spouting their hypocritical bullshit.

3D printing ain't shit compared to CNC machining and technical knowledge. Even if you could sign a piece of paper to make all guns illegal and/or magically disappear, illicit machine shops would begin to make copies. People build AK clones in caves after all.

Hell the Phillipines has a giant hobby of making backyard guns. You can literally go the the hardware store and make a LEGAL single shot pump shotgun. As long as the barrel is 18 inches and the overall length is 26 inches you are completely legal eagle.

 

[Rio]

One point I'd like to make about cars. You can buy one from a private seller without needing a license. Hell you can physically drive it on the road illegally. Do we now prevent people from selling cars privately? Because they have to have faith in the person buying it is going to file the title for it.

Yeah you can buy one but you're not legally allowed to use it if you don't have a driver's license.

 

[Maxliam]

Yeah you can buy one but you're not legally allowed to use it if you don't have a driver's license.

It's only illegal if you get caught.

 

[Funnybone]

I'm a chick and have been called cute before. I average between 120-140lbs.

I have been accosted by a lot of creeps. I have always felt safe knowing that theres a gun in my purse. I haven't needed to take it out then, but if some creep tries to fucking harm me, I have the advantage.

Anyone for gun control is retarded especially men who are because we chicks cant fucking win a fight with a guy. The great equalizer and all.

So yeah, give all women guns plz.