Why am I not surprised its from a California dem?
But yeah, that would be a great way of getting a bunch of people shot.
Why are we targeting 'assault weapons' instead of something like pistols?
Do people not care about numbers or what?
No they don't. If they cared about numbers then the conversation would be entirely different. Instead its "We'll pick the scary looking things that in relation to homicides is statistically insignificant because they're scary and have been used in hi-profile incidents"
the fucking article image
im crying on the inside
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/108570/bcfbdf0a-b87a-4cfc-bd18-9301964d1d99/image.png
Holy shit, the number of antiques - rare antiques, even. These people are clueless.
Don't see an issue with that image the guns per capita in America is way too fucking high, it needs to be reduced significantly through methods like this.
But this is still a dumb comment by the congressman because assault weapons is still a meme word that has no actual meaning.
Several of those are irreplaceable historic pieces that can’t be attributed to any kind of crime whatsoever. What’s the point of destroying then? They do not belong in a crusher.
If you're going to ban any gun, ban handguns. Unfortunately, that will make people much angrier than a ban on these.
I'm not sure why rarity of items used to kill people matters.
I don't disagree but the government has never cared about that sort of thing like, ever. Lots of antique cars get crushed and a lot of valuable stuff gets destroyed all the time. Ideally those could be preserved but I doubt many of them are the only ones in existence and there are still plenty in private collections.
It'd be nice to have certain things like cars, guns, etc tagged as antiques and voided from crushing, instead donated to museums but that would require hiring actual experts and could be open to abuse like how historical buildings are.
Wouldn't you want actual experts to be in charge of an endeavor like this in the first place? And, like, not someone who spews incorrect knowledge and tries to propose new laws based on it?
I want that for a lot of things, too bad we don't live in this fantasy land where people who know what they're talking about get to decide what happens for everyone and can only hope elected idiots can do the right thing.
"They're not coming for your guns" is a statement I never want to hear out of the anti-gun side ever again.
Here we go again... I'm going to approach this from another angle and say do you really trust your local legislators to make sensible coherent laws that don't fuck over everybody but them? I don't. Usually when government gets involved the hammer is dropped and no one wins.
Also crossbows.
I appreciate the honesty. Instead of beating around the bush, one of em just comes right out and says it. It's something that the pro gun side has known for a hot minute. I'm tired of these anti-gun people trying to obfuscate their true intentions.
So do you gun-loving people have any ideas on how to fix gun violence? I fully support single-payer universal healthcare in conjunction with easy access to mental healthcare, but I'm sure some of you think that's "dirty socialism".
It's really fucked up we live in a country where people buy a pistol and fantasize about shooting some poor shit who tries to steal a CD case and when they run away in certain states like Texas you are protected by law to fucking shoot someone over $50 worth of shit as they actively try to escape and pose no threat to your personal self. I can't find it but I clearly remember a story of a homeless man who was just taking a shower in some dude's off-home property and the dude went back to his house, got a gun, and shot the homeless dude who was just taking a shower and MAYBE used like $2 of water to do so, didn't make a threatening move. The dude could've called the police or something but instead wanted to fulfill his weird fantasy of shooting a home intruder.
I see people here act like every gun owner is responsible but when shit like that happens I can't agree. And I need to add this disclaimer a thousand times, no I don't think every gun owner is a bloodthirsty sociopath, no I don't think guns need to be totally banned, but the pro-gun side needs to stop acting like gun culture in America isn't fucked up as hell and encourages weirdos like that to behave that way and that EVERY gun owner is a "responsible adult who behaves well". I'm fine with gun ownership as long as it's actually handled like other countries do it. You can reasonably get a gun in Norway, Sweden, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia. Some things are just too dangerous to have widespread ownership and too easy to access by idiots, guns are one of those things.
Please, try and take them!
At least these tyrants-in-diapers are being honest with themselves for once.
Maybe we should use all these guns to finally revolt against our oppressive masters (rich and those bribed by the rich, like this congressman here) and create a socialist government that takes care of its people and can defend itself with all these guns.
This guy is my congressman.
He's just another one of those corporate mouthpieces who is in it for the fame and fortune. He says he's progressive but then he votes the other way, fuck this guy. He's the kind of person that is what is wrong with silicon valley, the kind of person who thinks they're too smart to think so they just take things at face value because they think they're too smart to be deceived.
I love living here but people are fucking stupid and have the same mentality as inbred trump supporters where they think they can do no wrong because they believe they have good intentions. I'd like to vote this guy out of office at the midterms but it's unlikely since people just check D without looking at anything.
The easiest way to lower gun crime is to put more money into social services and mental/health Care. Take away the reasons for people to commit crime, which mostly boils down to poverty.
The current people who are winning right now get 10s of thousands of people killed each year due to lack of health insurance. ~35,000 of people get killed each year through gun violence (poverty heavily influencing). ~55,000 drug-induced deaths (also heavily influenced by poverty). ~33,000 alcohol-related deaths (more poverty).
Capitalism creates poverty. Poverty is profitable. Therefore, capitalism itself is responsible for many of those deaths. In my previous post where I say handguns should be banned instead of rifles, I was going off the actual statistics that handguns kill more people. But if we really want to fix the problems of society, we need to fight our oppressive, bourgeoisie government and those who control it.
"35,000 people are killed by gun violence!" its more 8500 ~ 9000... The 30,000+ number is if you include suicides. I honestly vouch for assisted suicide, so I'm impartial to the latter number.
Even with those 9000 murders, most come down to gang violence. People killing each other over stupid tribal-mental type bullshit. The solution to that is a lot harder to deal with, as it's mostly a symptom of a much larger issue relating to criminology.
Either way, it's still not a big enough of an issue to infringe on the rights of 300,000,000+ people.
Do you know why those governments always end up oppressive and in shambles? Because the United States government has a divine interest in never letting an economic system that favors the working class instead of the rich function. It isn't good for them for a place to exist where the working class can thrive. Besides, warring against them is profitable, as is all war, for the U.S. We have the biggest military, so we'll never lose. And with propaganda, we get to make the people support the horrible things the U.S. does, so there's literally no reason not to go to war with a socialist country.
Legitimately, people who push assault weapon bans only care when white people get shot.
The bans wouldn't be as stupid if they focused on weapons that were actually linked to high rates of criminal incidences.
The issue with "assault weapon" bans is that they don't even target the kinds of weapons that are a problem, so at absolute best they just aren't effective.
Reduce poverty, further education, fix the healthcare system, end war on drugs, increase wages, more subsidized housing for low income areas, ect.
Trying to ban guns to end gun crime is retarded. Prohibition has never worked on anything in history. Target the causes of gun violence and solve those, and gun violence disappears.
Or we could make racist legislation that makes it tough for primarily black people in low income areas to buy guns to defend themselves. Or you can pass feel good legislation like AWBs that do nothing.
Again, I don't actually support gun bans. The buy-back program I stated is about as far as I would go in reducing the amount of guns in the country. All those things you said need to happen.
Suicides usually are based on individual cases. Some people do it thanks to poverty, sometimes oppression, sometimes drug abuse... It's just a matter of what someone is willing to take, and everyone's different.
Get off that high horse, the media as a whole has a habit of not caring about poor people when they get shot unless the police are the ones doing it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
