Half a million #MarchForOurLives protesters rally in Washington DC
704 replies, posted
Already exists because we have so many guns in America. If I wanted to, and looked hard enough, I could find someone to sell me a 1911 with no serial, probably stolen. Current laws are not keeping weapons out of the hands of those who are the most dangerous. There needs to be more strict measures.
I didn't argue there didn't need to be. I didn't argue there wasn't an illegal gun market. I did argue it would get larger with the supposed gun ban somebody have thought of as a catch all solution.
Argue with what what I said.
I don't see why we need the Second Amendment anyway. Much freer countries than ours get away without including anything like it, and I think it's ended up fostering a toxic culture.
Then less people should treat them as such.
thats all shit you have to plan and do, a gun can be grabbed and used spontaneously
So, here's a tip for people in armed militia groups who have detailed battle plans on how to sabotage state power grids, and don't want to be labeled a domestic terrorist: resist the urge to share bomb-making tips on public forums.
Is that really a thing that just happened.
With this, I motion to reverse the decision to remove the GDi section, because THAT CERTAINLY DIDN'T WORK.
I didn't know my father posted on here.
Does newpunch even have a refugee camp?
Because If it does I'd be worried that Joey Skylynx is about to try suicide bombing it.
I find it astonishing how disingenuous some pro-gun posters are being by being ready to acknowledge any source of criminality and violence except gun ownership.
Sure, poverty and mental health play a role in murder rates, but when you compare US and UK murder rates and see that US cities with 4 times lower poverty rates than the UK average have murder rates almost 5 times higher, you've got to realize that these aren't the sole factors behind such abhorrently high rates in the US.
Pro-gun posters are also always very eager to point out countries with high gun ownership and low murder rates, as if it disproved any link between weapon proliferation and committing murder, yet they completely ignore the myriad of countries with much lower living standards and much poorer mental health care... that also happen to have much lower murder rates. Evidently, that whole line of logic is complete bunk, unless you plan to claim that mental health and poverty also have nothing to do with homicide rates.
It's also quite disingenuous to complain about suicides being taken into account in gun violence statistics when links have been shown between firearm ownership and suicide. Proliferation is actually leading to more people killing themselves.
So, yeah, like it or not, proliferation does appear to increase lethality, and to contribute to your country's high murder and suicide rates (along with accidental deaths). You should at least acknowledge that it's part of the problem.
Don't know if this has been posted already, but another thing we can dispel is just how large an effect mental health has on school shootings and gun homicides in general. Vanderbilt Uni did a study that found only ~5% of the 120k gun related homicides between 2001 and 2010 had mental health problems. 5%
But you need to target means of illegal distribution. Passing legislation which only targets legally owned firearms and banning semiautomatic rifles will not have any effect on gun violence, because both of those things are the least likely to be used in gun crimes by a HUGE margin.
This has already been demonstrated in this country and it didn’t work before. We’re not acknowledging legal gun ownership as a source of violence because aside from suicide rates, it’s borderline a statistical non-factor.
Why would you ban him but leave the post open for all to read
So you think it's a coincidence that the country that hosts the most legally owned weapons also hosts the most illegally owned ones? Pretty much every illegally owned weapon was legally owned at some point. No matter how hard you'll try to curb illegal distribution, it will always be there as long as there's a virtually unlimited supply of legal weapons to acquire. Sure, it'll probably make a decent difference if you know what you're doing, but you won't reach the low murder rates of countries where proliferation, legal or illegal, isn't as high.
Also, you don't get to dismiss suicide by firearms so easily. There are twice as many firearm suicides as there are firearm homicides in the US, and both are pretty damn numerous.
Just in case homeland security needs to use it as evidence against him one day lol
People really are hyping up the "illegal distribution" aspect of firearms controls.
yes, there will be a black market. Even we have a black market over here. With a bit of careful searching and a complete lack of morals I could probably find a busted up handgun or imported AK full-auto conversion somewhere in the country. But that is an entirely separate problem. Black markets are fed via the legal markets around them. For a gun to enter the black market here it has to come from somewhere else without being intercepted. For a gun to enter the black market in the US it has to just be taken from a legal owner or cross state lines. Hell if I recall there's a problem of guns just "walking off" the production line never to be seen again.
It takes a different set of laws to deal with the black market. But the black market isn't entirely what gun control is meant to eradicate. Gun control sure as shit does start to dry up supply, making black markets more expensive and harder to approach. And it's not like your next big murder-suicide or school shooting scenarios are going to be getting their shit off the black market (short of the extremely prepared school shooters who already have contacts in these markets anyway). Gun control is meant to inhibit lower level criminals who otherwise wouldn't have access to a gun, or spur of the moment murders and suicides from being as easy to enact. Your average home intruder almost certainly isn't going to be buying a piece from a black market dealer once supply starts to crank up the prices. Shit, they'd likely be less inclined to even need a gun if their targets are unarmed. Why risk getting even more jail time for illegal arms possession on top of breaking and entering when it's unlikely you're going to get shot yourself.
you're kidding, right?
No, my point being the mental health issues you picked are just about the least dangerous to others.
So the intent behind the post doesn't matter or... ?
Also good job further specifying his instructions so that people willing to follow them end up with a less shitty explosive.
I think it's probably more to do with him generally coming across as a budding crazed gunman than that his advice might actually lead to the manufacture of explosives.
It's a little weird to randomly chip in bomb making tips on top of the weirdo militia stuff he's posted previously.
I'd expect that having guns would just mean that said government would be pressing down even harder on its populace, knowing that it would meet resistance.
He didn't explain how to make or acquire the other things necessary, though.
the people willing to follow his instructions will know a lot more through 2 minutes of googling, i literally do not know shit about explosives and everything that i talked about is common sense. Part of my counter terrorism course was talking about how terrorists build bombs and the instructor stressed over and over that just having the explosive material barely counted for anything if you dont know how to do the rest
2 minutes of googling which you have made easier by providing useful contextual information.
Dd you miss the constant disturburbing commentary about how he and his "militia" buddies know how to cripple the power grid, or how the only reason he's still not part of said militia is because he had to move. Or how the entire thing sounds a lot like a domestic terrorist group. The info on how he knows how to make a bomb doesn't help his case of being a nutjob.
I mean shit I know how to make napalm and other weird weapons but that's just from reading random media. I don't go around saying how I have plans on how to detonate gas lines around my city and am part of an armed group to overthrow the government. Also to give you a little info, the only modern sucessful Russian revolution was the bolshevik rebellion, and that wasn't because they had guns, it was because other nations funded their crusade with heavy artillery and armored vehicles. Unless you have the backing of an army, a bunch of civilians will have no chance overthrowing a modern military like the US. I mean shit, with today's military and tech, planes and gunships are able to pick you off before you even know what's up.
Now if Russia (lol) sent training specialists and shit like radar backed anti-air launchers or anti tank launchers then sure, you might have a grasp on it, but people running around with AR-15s is about as effective as Afghan insurgents. But Afghan insurgents probably have better hardware than most us citizens to begin with.
Not to mention they are far more radical and willing to die for their cause.
Okay, again: I don't care whether or not it's easy and I don't care about whether or not it's effective -- don't use these forums to discuss how to create, refine, and utilize explosive devices, and/or chemical weapons, and/or narcotics, etc. I'm a bit surprised that needs to be said, but there it is.
Well atleast we agree on something.
That being said the only people here calling them "toys" are the same people that want them banned because they look scary.
And no im denying the fact that there are people outside of this forum that own guns and think they are toys before anyone tries to imply that
I can kinda confirm this with anecdotal evidence. One of my best friends was William Atchison, the dude who nearly pulled off a school shooting. For the twelve years I knew him, I knew him as a very depressed person with far-right beliefs.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.