• Gun Control: Where do you draw the line?
    964 replies, posted
[QUOTE=download;39190236]Study does not include times where guns are used in self defence but when no shots are fired or where no one dies. Just brandishing a gun during a home invasion makes most people scamper off [editline]12th January 2013[/editline] With careful selection you can make any stats swing your way[/QUOTE] Can you find me a study that includes all that? [QUOTE=Black Milano;39194395]Gun related murders are irrelevant, we should care about overall murders. If taking away the guns only means that now people stab instead of shooting each other, the policy was useless and detrimental to freedom.[/QUOTE] There's no chance every gun related murder would be replaced with other means. Guns are too convenient of a murder weapon for that to be the case.
[QUOTE=No_Excuses;39195494]There's no chance every gun related murder would be replaced with other means. Guns are too convenient of a murder weapon for that to be the case.[/QUOTE] So you essentially don't know the effect of gun restrictions in overall crime. Don't worry, neither do I and neither does anybody. This is my beef with gun control. People treat it as a certain cure when in fact we have no idea of it's actual overall effects, other than it restrains liberty.
[QUOTE=Black Milano;39195876]So you essentially don't know the effect of gun restrictions in overall crime. Don't worry, neither do I and neither does anybody. This is my beef with gun control. People treat it as a certain cure when in fact we have no idea of it's actual overall effects, other than it restrains liberty.[/QUOTE] Actually, in some places there is substantial evidence that it has no net benefit to public safety or crime rates whatsoever.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;39195900]Actually, in some places there is substantial evidence that it has no net benefit to public safety or crime rates whatsoever.[/QUOTE] This is my hunch as well, buy i don't have any data to back that up.
The school shooting problem could be solved by posting an armed security guard in all schools, or at least allowing, say, the principal to keep a Glock in a locked cabinet in his office, or something of that nature. The only other real alternative is to research more into mental disabilities, and how to deal with/cure them before they end in school shootings. I think you know which one would probably be easier to accomplish.
[url=http://www.assaultweapon.info/]What is and is not an assault rifle[/url]
[QUOTE=Ridge;39200608][url=http://www.assaultweapon.info/]What is and is not an assault rifle[/url][/QUOTE] Thank you very much for this.
[QUOTE=Usernameztaken;39198189]The school shooting problem could be solved by posting an armed security guard in all schools, or at least allowing, say, the principal to keep a Glock in a locked cabinet in his office, or something of that nature. The only other real alternative is to research more into mental disabilities, and how to deal with/cure them before they end in school shootings. I think you know which one would probably be easier to accomplish.[/QUOTE] That's a good summary I suppose, but it makes some terrible comparisons just to rile up its supporters: "Like prohibition, the United States has gone down this road before. It didn't work then, and it won't work now." Oh, it's also from the NRA so I'd question what key info they're leaving out.
Comparing it to alcohol prohibition is bad because alcohol is so easy to make. Better off comparing it to things much more difficult to make like hard drugs (Meth, cocaine, opium etc)
[QUOTE=download;39201864]Comparing it to alcohol prohibition is bad because alcohol is so easy to make. Better off comparing it to things much more difficult to make like hard drugs (Meth, cocaine, opium etc)[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/179192-DIY-Shovel-AK-photo-tsunami-warning!]Man builds an AK-47 from a shovel[/url] [url=http://thebrigade.thechive.com/2010/07/20/in-a-pinch-improvised-weapons-26-photos/]Gallery of improvised weapons[/url] [url=http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/the-homemade-guns-of-the-chechen-army]Homemade guns of the Chechen Army[/url]
[img]http://static.latercera.com/20100510/931216_400.jpg[/img] 12 gauge shotgun out of some pipes and insulation tape, no welding.
Sten guns have been illegally manufactured by people in Canada and the UK.
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;39206217]Sten guns have been illegally manufactured by people in Canada and the UK.[/QUOTE] That's actually exactly what the maker of the Sten wanted when he designed it, he wanted a gun so simple that any Briton could build one for the defence of their country, should the need arise.
[QUOTE=Ridge;39188156]Please, none of this partisan rhetoric. Neither party has been looking out for our rights and freedoms.[/QUOTE] Well maybe somebody should. As for the "partisan rhetoric" part, I'm a registered democrat that believes in the second amendment. [editline]13th January 2013[/editline] Also George Mason said "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
If I were in power my plan would be: 1.Shut Down every single factory,shop,business,etc. that deals,buys,sells,or makes firearms, pack them up and sell them off to the highest bidding country. 2.Then, I would use every resource, every cent, every man I could to confiscate every single weapon from every single individual in the country, any resistance will be dealt with swiftly to insure that this operation get done in less than 2 years. 3. I would then abolish/disband the military, the navy, the air force, marines, etc. and all law enforcement, secret service, CIA, NRA, etc. and sell off any and all weapons acquired. There, it's the perfect plan, anyone who says otherwise is an absolute fool, and does not deserve to live. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("This is NOT debating" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=RidleySmash;39210500] 3. I would then abolish/disband the military, the navy, the air force, marines, etc. and all law enforcement, secret service, CIA, NRA, etc. [/QUOTE] Right, then after you disband them, who will protect you from the inevitable uprising?
[QUOTE=GravyKing;39210588]Right, then after you disbanded them. Who will protect you from the inevitable uprising?[/QUOTE] I will then disappear into the most remote place I can find, and laugh my ass off as America goes to hell
[QUOTE=RidleySmash;39210618]I will then disappear into the most remote place I can find, and laugh my ass off as America goes to hell[/QUOTE] Then America will just back to normal.
Nobody would have weapons anyway, so it doesn't matter either way
[QUOTE=RidleySmash;39210500]If I were in power my plan would be: 1.Shut Down every single factory,shop,business,etc. that deals,buys,sells,or makes firearms, pack them up and sell them off to the highest bidding country. 2.Then, I would use every resource, every cent, every man I could to confiscate every single weapon from every single individual in the country, any resistance will be dealt with swiftly to insure that this operation get done in less than 2 years. 3. I would then abolish/disband the military, the navy, the air force, marines, etc. and all law enforcement, secret service, CIA, NRA, etc. and sell off any and all weapons acquired. There, it's the perfect plan, anyone who says otherwise is an absolute fool, and does not deserve to live.[/QUOTE] Congratulations, you've just completely disarmed your own nation while simultaneously strengthening other nations. Have fun with the quick and inevitable invasion. I seriously hope you're joking, there's just so much wrong with that. [editline]yeah[/editline] [QUOTE=RidleySmash;39210618]I will then disappear into the most remote place I can find, and laugh my ass off as America goes to hell[/QUOTE] Okay yeah you're just fucking around
[QUOTE=Bazkip;39210758]Congratulations, you've just completely disarmed your own nation while simultaneously strengthening other nations. Have fun with the quick and inevitable invasion. I seriously hope you're joking, there's just so much wrong with that. [editline]yeah[/editline] Okay yeah you're just fucking around[/QUOTE] Nope, that's exactly what I'd do, If people want guns gone, that's exactly how I'd give it to them, it's their problem then.
I just realized that none of these solutions will work on their own. What we should be doing is A. Make guns harder to get. I'm pretty sure they are even now are easier to get then cars. And I me ALL guns, rifles, and especially pistols should be harder to get. Bans would be unreasonable as Benjamin Franklin once said "Loosing liberties for security makes you have no security at all." B. Mental Health. Make sure people with family or perhaps even relatives with mental sickness DO NOT GET GUNS, or make sure somehow they will be out of the hands of them (Weapon vault where people can retrieve their weapons to go hunting or for competition). C. Stop the media from talking about shooters or shootings. I now can see that people who say this are definitely right. They "popularize" school shooting and just regular shootings even. It's like why some people kill the president, or why they killed the guy in the Beetles. This works bi-partisan (hope I'm using that correctly) because both sides get what they wanted. Gun Right activists don't get guns banned and Gun Control activists get tighter gun restrictions. Plus those last two help stop SHOOTINGS in general. There will always be some form of murder in the US. Obama is doing some of this now but I'm pretty sure that the media isn't covered and he's trying to get "Assault Weapons" [QUOTE=Ridge;39200608][url=http://www.assaultweapon.info/]What is and is not an assault rifle[/url][/QUOTE] banned.
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;39211584] A. Make guns harder to get. I'm pretty sure they are even now are easier to get then cars. And I me ALL guns, rifles, and especially pistols should be harder to get.[/QUOTE] You'll need to expand on this a bit. Harder to get how? more taxes? background check? proficiency tests? [QUOTE=TornadoAP;39211584]B. Mental Health. Make sure people with family or perhaps even relatives with mental sickness DO NOT GET GUNS, or make sure somehow they will be out of the hands of them (Weapon vault where people can retrieve their weapons to go hunting or for competition).[/QUOTE] Adam Lanza stole the weapons. How do you enforce mandatory vaults without violating the Fourth Amendment? do you realize the amount of resources that would be needed?. Why should my freedom concerning weapons be denied if my sister has mental issues? I'm not responsible for her condition and you can't restrain me for it. [QUOTE=TornadoAP;39211584]C. Stop the media from talking about shooters or shootings. I now can see that people who say this are definitely right. They "popularize" school shooting and just regular shootings even. It's like why some people kill the president, or why they killed the guy in the Beetles.[/QUOTE] That's a violation of the First Amendment and a totalitarian policy. How is it any different from the Soviet Union or North Korea?
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;39211584]B. Mental Health. Make sure people with family or perhaps even relatives with mental sickness DO NOT GET GUNS, or make sure somehow they will be out of the hands of them (Weapon vault where people can retrieve their weapons to go hunting or for competition).[/QUOTE] I really don't think you thought this idea through, you are criminalizing people with mental illness.
[QUOTE=Valnar;39212063]I really don't think you thought this idea through, you are criminalizing people with mental illness.[/QUOTE] Indeed. Reason has a well-written article exposing the flaw with revoking rights based on a perceived standard of mental health. I cannot find it but [URL="http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/26/who-is-too-unbalanced-to-be-armed"]this is somewhat similar[/URL]. The problem with defining mental illness and using a it as a justification to strip people of their rights is that it can be used to shut-out people of different political views deemed "radical" or "dangerous" by an opposing group. Opposition groups have often been construed as mentally ill by competitors. Revoking a person's constitutional right if another's liberties have been violated can be argued but until someone does that you cannot strip a right(in this case the second amendment) from someone with any grounded argument. I don't recall anyone touching on this in any length besides one of the earlier posts but from what I've read(I need to research more) mass shootings haven't increased(or decreased) over time. The frequency is inconsistent from year to year. [IMG]http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/Mass%20Shootings%201980-2010.jpg[/IMG] ([URL="http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2012/08/no_increase_in_mass_shootings.html"]Retrieved from Boston.com[/URL])
[QUOTE=Black Milano;39211955]You'll need to expand on this a bit. Harder to get how? more taxes? background check? proficiency tests?[/QUOTE] I don't know. There are many ways to do this. Some as you suggested, other too. [QUOTE=Black Milano;39211955]Adam Lanza stole the weapons. How do you enforce mandatory vaults without violating the Fourth Amendment? do you realize the amount of resources that would be needed?. Why should my freedom concerning weapons be denied if my sister has mental issues? I'm not responsible for her condition and you can't restrain me for it.[/QUOTE] I never said that that solution would be it, I have no idea I was just giving an example of what we could do. Maybe if your sister that has a condition that isn't to bad or something? I don't know I'm just thinking of ideas of what we could do instead of this stupid argument. [QUOTE=Black Milano;39211955]That's a violation of the First Amendment and a totalitarian policy. How is it any different from the Soviet Union or North Korea?[/QUOTE] Once again I don't know how you can accomplish this with out breaking the freedom of speech. Maybe make a tax or something? It wouldn't be like the Soviet Union or North Korea because we wouldn't be covering up the government, just trying to stop getting some people the wrong idea that killing everyone is good. And no I'm not criminalizing mentally ill. I'm criminalizing the ones that want to kill everyone to go down in history. Tl:dr I don't know how to do this, I'm just saying what we could do to try and stop this. (Lol Ideas guy right?) On a side note; Give me better IDEAS to stop this.
Stop what? Overall homicide has been steadily decreasing for the past 5 years. Why is it a problem now?
I don't understand the whole "You don't need automatic firearms." argument because look at it this way, did the founding fathers at the time be like, "well you all have the right to own bows and arrows but muskets, no, those are military grade technology, you don't need those." No, so where do they get that argument, I really don't get it, because the entire argument is based around the fact that automatic weapons are top level military grade technology, but at the time of the constitution, so were muskets.
[QUOTE=Black Milano;39211955] Adam Lanza stole the weapons. How do you enforce mandatory vaults without violating the Fourth Amendment? do you realize the amount of resources that would be needed?. [/QUOTE] You're right. He did. It was completely preventable and now there's people dead because of it.
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39224110]You're right. He did. It was completely preventable and now there's people dead because of it.[/QUOTE] And you ignore the entire rest of that post. Did you learn nothing?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.