994 mass shootings in 1,004 days: this is what America's gun crisis looks like
477 replies, posted
We will have to agree to disagree, since we all are already decided on our stances. But it's nice to have discourse with you all, gives me stuff to think about.
[editline]4th December 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49242563]Now that you've compared firearms ownership to slavery you might as well go the extra mile and call gun owners Hitler. Don't chicken out now![/QUOTE]
My point was that there's a precedent for the original Constitution to be changed. Not that gun owners are slave drivers.
[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;49237265]Do you think that homicides are committed by sane people?[/QUOTE]
Considering Breivik was declared sane after mowing down dozens of kids at a goddamn summer camp and put in a lovely place to play tennis, I'm sure some people that murder are sane.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49236383]My concern with "expensive collectors'" weapons is not how often they are used, but the devastating effect to which they can be used when they are. While I know that it would negatively impact hobbyists, I simply see no reason whatsoever why semi-automatic high capacity rifles, carbines, and pistols should be available to the public at large. I understand that dedicated hobbyists are likely among the most responsible gun owners there are, but their ability to engage in their hobby by purchasing the most dangerous weaponry available short of actual modern military hardware comes at the cost of those who would use those weapons for nefarious purposes also having access to them as well. An interesting hobby is simply not worth the cost in human lives in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
SEMI AUTOMATIC HIGH CAPACITY RIFLE
you know that almost no gun crimes per year are committed with rifles, right. It's almost all pistols, from gang violence.
Edit:
By the way, you know that "semi-automatic high capacity rifles, carbines, and pistols" covers, well, pretty much all weapons available to the public with the exception of shotguns, bolt action rifles, and muzzle loaded black powder muskets, right?
The majority of gun ownership is for defense of the self or home, and the hobby aspect is just an added bonus.
Also, likening what a hobbyist can pick up to military hardware is an unfair comparison- our military gets it's power from conventional explosives and our air force, not rifles. Rifles are effective in our troops, sure, but no civilian can easily acquire anything close to the level of effective Military hardware. It's almost impossible to get an automatic rifle, by the way, which is the only real difference between military rifles and hunting/self defense ones.
[QUOTE=apierce1289;49236189]Guns don't have the ability to pull their own triggers. Guns don't force people to kill each other by putting a knife to your throat. People kill people, this isn't the guns fault. Criminals that want guns will always find a way to get them. We've already seen evidence of this from Paris. What we need is better mental health and better health care for all (preferably single payer) so these sick individuals can find help and get that help if they can't afford it and want it. This isn't a cookie cutter solution but it would be a good first step. Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE]
The United States has a mass shooting problem the same way it has a drug abuse and HIV problem. The only way they are going to fix these issues isnt by banning needles, guns, or gay sex. They need to overhaul their entire broken medical system and work towards getting rid of the stigma behind these problems so people arent afraid to seek treatment and the treatment wouldnt cost and arm and a leg. It needs to be readily available and free for anyone off the street in order to see a better outcome in the statistics.
Do you see many HIV cases, mass shootings, drug overdoses in well off and educated areas in the US? No, because most of these problems occur when local governments fail or are unable to address basic socioeconomic issues and healthcare issues among other things.
Edit: In totally unrelated news, the united states senate voted to cut planned parenthood funding today....
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;49242781]
Edit: In totally unrelated news, the united states senate voted to cut planned parenthood funding today....[/QUOTE]
Well, we never said the government was ran by competent people who totally wouldn't believe an obviously faked set of videos...
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49237274]Don't let your fannypack explode, simmer down.
These are people pitching shit ideas that "have worked in so-and-so so they'll work in the us!"
Well call me Dan Rather because I've got a news flash for you son: There are almost 400,000,000 people in this country, increasing every day. Different people from different parts of the world, different beliefs, different ideologies, different races. What worked in one place isn't going to fucking work everywhere else. And if you seriously think for a second that people are going to just lie there and take the removal of a staple of the culture of this country since the very beginning, then you might literally be retarded.[/QUOTE]
Are you unable to debate without insults?
I think you're the one who should "simmer down"
I seriously hope you guys don't think this is anywhere near true.
Several of their sources list suicides and incidents where less than 2 people are murdered, not mass shootings.
On the topic of gun control: there is no way to stop people from illegally getting guns in the United States of America. There are [B]hundreds of millions[/B] of unlicensed guns in circulation, and all you have to do to obtain one is either buy it legally through a private seller, which many states have no laws on requiring paperwork for; or you could buy it illegally, which is piss easy. Even I know a guy who knows a guy who can get you a full auto AK if you pay him enough.
[QUOTE=bisousbisous;49243327]I seriously hope you guys don't think this is anywhere near true.
Several of their sources list suicides and incidents where less than 2 people are murdered, not mass shootings.
On the topic of gun control: there is no way to stop people from illegally getting guns in the United States of America. There are [B]hundreds of millions[/B] of unlicensed guns in circulation, and all you have to do to obtain one is either buy it legally through a private seller, which many states have no laws on requiring paperwork for; or you could buy it illegally, which is piss easy. Even I know a guy who knows a guy who can get you a full auto AK if you pay him enough.[/QUOTE]
"defined as four or more people shot in one incident "
That sounds like a mass shooting to me.
Pretty much all the ones in my city were gang related. Random killings like yesterdays are still extremely rare.
[QUOTE=bisousbisous;49243327]I seriously hope you guys don't think this is anywhere near true.
Several of their sources list suicides and incidents where less than 2 people are murdered, not mass shootings.
On the topic of gun control: there is no way to stop people from illegally getting guns in the United States of America. There are [B]hundreds of millions[/B] of unlicensed guns in circulation, and all you have to do to obtain one is either buy it legally through a private seller, which many states have no laws on requiring paperwork for; or you could buy it illegally, which is piss easy. Even I know a guy who knows a guy who can get you a full auto AK if you pay him enough.[/QUOTE]
Do you know a guy that's willing to sell an Illegal fully automatic AK-47? If a legally ownable full auto AK costs around $40k how much does an Illegal one cost? Why don't I just shave the sear down on any semi-auto gun and make it full auto?
Honestly, it's a hell of a lot easier to make a full auto gun then a semi-auto. And yet here even with all our guns we rarely see full autos used in crime. Why? Because it basically brings down the wrath of uncle Sam on your organisation thanks to the current political climate and terrorism.
And you've said it yourself, there are an estimated 300 million+ firearms in the country that are unregistered by any federal agency. So you try and register them all and you know what will happen? A good number of them will "disappear" and now you have a very lucrative black market for firearms. Same can be said for magazines and ammunition.
You think prohibition was bad, try taking the thing that's constitutionally protected.
purely anecdotal but I dont recall any real world situations of bump fire being effective in battle
Not saying it doesn't exit, I just don't think there's evidence of its effectiveness...
[QUOTE=MedicWine;49243683]purely anecdotal but I dont recall any real world situations of bump fire being effective in battle
Not saying it doesn't exit, I just don't think there's evidence of its effectiveness...[/QUOTE]
Having shot one, you won't be able to hit shit. Worrying about something as novelty as that is as pointless as worrying about a criminal using cruise control during a getaway.
why guns are even to be bought by civilians I will never know. no one needs a gun.
[QUOTE=jihadi john;49244005]why guns are even to be bought by civilians I will never know. no one needs a gun.[/QUOTE]
What a well thought out post. I don't understand why I didn't see the light sooner.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49242590]Not ruled unconstitutional but amended to change. What would likely be ruled unconstitutional is the hypothetical of the first ammendment being appealed, but for it to get there it would have to be a doomsday scenario.[/QUOTE]
Changes are not made unless something is deemed unconstitutional. For example, the amendment about slavery was made because slavery was decided to be unconstitutional. The Constitution cannot be changed just because, "Oh, this would kinda be better," that has never been and will never be grounds for an amendment.
[editline]4th December 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49242500]What is the National Guard? Do Americans need an armory of weapons in their attics 'to keep the government in check'?[/QUOTE]
[B]YES.[/B]
Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Nearly every tyrannical government in world history was preceded by gun control and eventual gun confiscation. The National Guard could easily be used to oppress. The rights in the Constitution apply to [I]all[/I] men and women. Every single individual in this country has the right to bear arms as a form of checks and balances. It makes zero sense for them to put in 9 fundamental rights that apply to every human being on this planet (we can only just enforce them in America) and 1 that applies only to specific militia-type groups.
[QUOTE=Megadave;49235942]Precisely, but not the guns themselves.[/QUOTE]
Make nukes easily accessible to everyone.
Nukes don´t kill, people do!!! Stop blaming nukes!
Do we really want to restrict access to nukes for everyone, just because a few idiots can´t be responsible around them?
[QUOTE=Rumbler;49244089]Make nukes easily accessible to everyone.
Nukes don´t kill, people do!!! Stop blaming nukes!
Do we really want to restrict access to nukes for everyone, just because a few idiots can´t be responsible around them?[/QUOTE]
just gonna point out that since the invention of nukes there hasn't been a world war. and there hasn't been a war between nuclear countries. we still get proxy wars taking place in countries without nuclear weapons however. the more nuclear weapons the safer the world is.
[QUOTE=jihadi john;49244005]why guns are even to be bought by civilians I will never know. no one needs a gun.[/QUOTE]
I like guns that's why
[QUOTE=bisousbisous;49244249]I like guns that's why[/QUOTE]
yeah and serial killers like killing. we can't always get what we want.
[QUOTE=jihadi john;49244293]yeah and serial killers like killing. we can't always get what we want.[/QUOTE]
But I am getting what I want. I can look on armslist for a long gun to buy, meet with the seller, exchange cash and gun, and be back at my place all without having to fill out ANY paperwork.
[QUOTE=bisousbisous;49244414]But I am getting what I want. I can look on armslist for a long gun to buy, meet with the seller, exchange cash and gun, and be back at my place all without having to fill out ANY paperwork.[/QUOTE]
not for long :)
this is an Americans crisis
[QUOTE=jihadi john;49244424]not for long :)[/QUOTE]
Shall not be infringed
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;49244017]Changes are not made unless something is deemed unconstitutional. For example, the amendment about slavery was made because slavery was decided to be unconstitutional. The Constitution cannot be changed just because, "Oh, this would kinda be better," that has never been and will never be grounds for an amendment.
[editline]4th December 2015[/editline]
[B]YES.[/B]
Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Nearly every tyrannical government in world history was preceded by gun control and eventual gun confiscation. The National Guard could easily be used to oppress. The rights in the Constitution apply to [I]all[/I] men and women. Every single individual in this country has the right to bear arms as a form of checks and balances. It makes zero sense for them to put in 9 fundamental rights that apply to every human being on this planet (we can only just enforce them in America) and 1 that applies only to specific militia-type groups.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but you see 'because this will be better' has always been a case for making ammendments, that's the whole point of the ammendment system in the first place. As for your second part well actually there's quite a lot of debate on what the 2nd amendment actually means. Until very recent times in fact, did the majority of the Supreme Court agree that 'the right to keep and bear arms' was a line specifically targeted at every joe blow American. If you read the entirety of the ammendment and keeping in mind the time of English language it was written it could possibly say "Congress shall not prohibit a well trained and organized militia, also will not prevent people from owning arms for that Militia". The 'well regulated militia' in this case is the National Guard, who ultimately are under dual control of the Governors and the Federal Government (when necessary). Also keep in mind that countless ammendments were considered 'violations' of the Constitution when they were first made. 14th ammendment? The inclusionary rule? Nowhere am I suggesting to take away people's guns, but I suggest to again severely regulate the types of weaponry Joe schmuckatelli can purchase and how easily he can do so. If you want a different perspective on the interntion of the 2nd ammendment I recommend you read this page [url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt2_user.html[/url]
I so sincerely wish it was possible for the entire world to stop murdering eachother, and still have guns widely available. The aesthetics of a firearm are fantastic, the mechanical aspect of them is mindblowing. It's a fine piece of craftsmanship with a very vile purpose, and I think that's a shame. It's such a waste that such an ingenious design can't be enjoyed and appreciated properly.
There's no gun crisis. Violence in this country, of all sorts not just with firearms, is at a 200+ year low. The only reason it seems worse than it is is because it's pushed in our faces by money-hungry media.
[QUOTE=jihadi john;49244293]yeah and serial killers like killing. we can't always get what we want.[/QUOTE]
It's an olympic sport.
You can't stop people from killing people by banning guns, the only way you can end murders is mandatory sterilization of all humans, and even that solution would take over 60 years. Humans are just greedy imperfect beings. Almost all of the progress of human civilization has been caused in one way or another by humans killing other humans. Any person is capable of being a mass murdering, torturing, raping monster, just look at Hitler or Isis. They are genetically the same exact species as you and I. So you can't change people, and the people who try to just doom themselves to a life of frustrating stress, and sometimes accomplish something good, but most of the time just end up miserable and/or dead. I know what I can accomplish, I can make my life happy and fulfilling. With hobbies like owning and shooting guns.
And besides, there's less violence now than in most any other period of human civilization, so I don't get what everyone is wining about.
[QUOTE=jihadi john;49244424]not for long :)[/QUOTE]
Funny, because that bogus law was already shot down. So the 30-06 I just got the other day with no paperwork, I can sell privately for some time.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49244867]Yeah but you see 'because this will be better' has always been a case for making ammendments, that's the whole point of the ammendment system in the first place. As for your second part well actually there's quite a lot of debate on what the 2nd amendment actually means. Until very recent times in fact, did the majority of the Supreme Court agree that 'the right to keep and bear arms' was a line specifically targeted at every joe blow American. If you read the entirety of the ammendment and keeping in mind the time of English language it was written it could possibly say "Congress shall not prohibit a well trained and organized militia, also will not prevent people from owning arms for that Militia". The 'well regulated militia' in this case is the National Guard, who ultimately are under dual control of the Governors and the Federal Government (when necessary). Also keep in mind that countless ammendments were considered 'violations' of the Constitution when they were first made. 14th ammendment? The inclusionary rule? Nowhere am I suggesting to take away people's guns, but I suggest to again severely regulate the types of weaponry Joe schmuckatelli can purchase and how easily he can do so. If you want a different perspective on the interntion of the 2nd ammendment I recommend you read this page [url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt2_user.html[/url][/QUOTE]
No, it could not possibly mean that. The whole, "It could be referencing people owning arms in a militia," argument falls flat on its face when the sentence is actually analyzed. This has been covered a fuckton of times, it is only up for interpretation by people who don't understand how to read properly.
When analyzed by someone who understands proper english, it states all people have the right to bear arms. Back then, the militia was the people. In order to have a militia in the first place, everyone must be allowed to carry weapons. Therefore, a militia being necessary to protect the people means people also need the right to carry arms in order to form said militia. The amendment is a one-two punch, all people have the right to carry arms, and said people should form a militia in order to defend freedom if called upon. You cannot have a militia made of the people without the right to bear arms, if the arms are supplied by the government then they are no longer an effective militia. Militias are meant as a last-resort defense when the government either fails or has become the oppressor, in both cases relying on them for weapons means the militia is completely useless. Militias should be formed by people using their personal rightfully owned weapons. This is similar to Sweden, where males who serve are given rifles to keep at home, it essentially becomes their rifle. Keeping everything in a National Guard armory = militia formed by the people is null.
The National Guard is not a true militia as well. You said it yourself, it's controlled by both the state and federal governments. Militias, especially back when the Constitution was drafted, were comprised of locals, operated by locals, and while ragtag in nature gave them the ability to fight back. The government should not be involved in any formation of militias because militias are there to check and balance the government. It's like putting a lock on a chest full of stuff you want to keep yourself from, but you know the combination so the lock is completely useless.
I bet if I organized a proper civilian militia, armed them with legally bought weapons, trained them, and set out to protect the people in any way other than a charity bake sale, we would all be labeled terrorists and arrested/killed within the month.
[editline]4th December 2015[/editline]
But yhheah in no way does the national guard even resemble a militia. It's just a government controlled military organization that operates on american soil and provides support in disasters and states of emergency.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.