Obama wants to bust your balls, and heads for renewing the assault weapons ban - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119527]Because of the chance that it makes it easily availible to anyone who wants to misuse one.[/QUOTE] Everything can be misused. I don't see your point.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;37119448]What are you basing this on? If someone has the intent of doing something they'll probably still do it.[/QUOTE] Not really answering my question, is it? Besides - in this case, I'm not the one who needs to provide evidence (although I will, later, when I get home from work). If a person doesn't have acess to the weapon, they can't carry out the attack. End of story. Can you prove they will always go out of their way to acquire one illegally?

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119527]Because it makes it availible to anyone who wants to misuse one.[/QUOTE] Ban cars because people commit hit and runs. Ban knives because people can be stabbed. I'd also like to take this time to acknowledge the attempted banning of almost anything ever. Prohibition and the war on drugs stand out. Remember how effective those were? And how they totally didn't lead to a massive increase in organized crime?

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37118285]I'll need a sidearm the moment I'm robbed or attacked in any way. Just because it's not an everyday danger doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.[/QUOTE] Only an American would think that guns protect people.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119527]Because it makes it availible to anyone who wants to misuse one.[/QUOTE] By that logic we should ban knives because you can stab people with them and ban wrenches and hammers because you can hit people over the head with them. I do admit that guns are made with the sole intention of killing something, however, they can be used in a good fashion like self-defense as well as a bad fashion like robbing a bank. It's a double-edged sword, sure, but one that's worth keeping around. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=David29;37119552]Not really answering my question, is it? Besides - in this case, I'm not the one who needs to provide evidence (although I will, later, when I get home from work). If a person doesn't have acess to the weapon, they can't carry out the attack. End of story. Can you prove they will always go out of their way to acquire one illegally?[/QUOTE] By that same logic, can you prove that people will go out of their way to use guns illegally?

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119527]Because it makes it availible to anyone who wants to misuse one.[/QUOTE] They're available to people who want them badly enough regardless, oh, gun shop has no AR-15s? Oh well, I'll just go to Black Market Bert and get one without all that licensing required.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119527]Because it makes it availible to anyone who wants to misuse one.[/QUOTE] Are you suggesting that by having a gun ban law all the citizens and criminals would line up at the police department and hand them in? LOL GOOD LUCK!

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37119563]Ban cars because people commit hit and runs. Ban knives because people can be stabbed. I'd also like to take this time to acknowledge the attempted banning of almost anything ever. Prohibition and the war on drugs stand out. Remember how effective those were? And how they totally didn't lead to a massive increase in organized crime?[/QUOTE] The thing is, Cars are means of transportation and are not built to kill. Whilst a knife works very well as a weapon, it can still be used as a tool, it has a funtion beyond killing people, and besides, you cant kill 50 people with a goddamn knife in seconds. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Rebi;37119588]They're available to people who want them badly enough regardless, oh, gun shop has no AR-15s? Oh well, I'll just go to Black Market Bert and get one without all that licensing required.[/QUOTE] Well, good luck finding that black market, it's not like they are waving their arms and shouting "GET YOUR ILLEGAL FIREARMS HERE" No, you'd have to get into a lot of shit to get to them.

[QUOTE=David29;37119552]Not really answering my question, is it? Besides - in this case, I'm not the one who needs to provide evidence (although I will, later, when I get home from work). If a person doesn't have acess to the weapon, they can't carry out the attack. End of story. Can you prove they will always go out of their way to acquire one illegally?[/QUOTE] If they don't have access to that weapon[or tool] then yes they won't commit the crime with that weapon. That would be true. But to say that same person wouldn't attempt to commit the same crime with a different weapon would be asinine. And I couldn't exactly provide you with evidence either way... I personally bought all my firearms legally, and the only one which I received as a gift for my 18th Birthday[Makarov PM], I'm going to be getting a Class 2 CWL for. What I can tell you though is that manufacturing stuff like firearms, explosives, and illicit items isn't all that complicated.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119597]The thing is, Cars are means of transportation and are not built to kill. Whilst a knife works very well as a weapon, it can still be used as a tool, it has a funtion beyond killing people, and besides, you cant kill 50 people with a goddamn knife in seconds.[/QUOTE] Guns have a function beyond killing people as well, they can be used for hunting and sport/competition shooting. If every gun disappeared from the face of the earth, there would be an impact on crime. A ban doesn't do that though. It just makes it so that the average person can't, and won't buy a gun. Do you really think that's going to stop some nutjob from acquiring a rifle and shooting a bunch of people up? Do you think it's going to somehow ignore every other trend out there and NOT lead to a new booming black market trade?

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119527]Because it makes it availible to anyone who wants to misuse one.[/QUOTE] Going back the the topic at hand, renewing the assault weapons ban isn't going to change that. The AWB was reactionary legislation designed to ban guns seem as popular among the gang communities of the 90s, instead of cracking down on the actual illegal firearms trade, the legislature introduced a sweeping ban on aesthetics and features shared with those firearms which were popular among gangs in the 90s. For example the restriction on barrel shrouds and forward magazine position on pistols were meant specifically to target the TEC-9 and its variations. Instead of banning the illegal trade of that specific weapon which keep in mind is already illegal to trade illegally because its illegal, the legislature decided on a sweeping ban which only affects people who buy and use firearms legally. [video=youtube;9rGpykAX1fo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGpykAX1fo[/video] Keep in mind this is who wrote the legislation. The AWB is a total joke. There are plenty of ways to introduce sensible forms of gun control without an outright ban on weapons which seem to be deadlier than others because they have a bayonet lug or pistol grip.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119597]The thing is, Cars are means of transportation and are not built to kill. Whilst a knife works very well as a weapon, it can still be used as a tool, it has a funtion beyond killing people, and besides, you cant kill 50 people with a goddamn knife in seconds.[/QUOTE] Look, I don't know if you've been reading the last page or so but you don't seem to be getting something. Whether or not guns are illegal, [b][u]criminal will always have them and will always use them to advance their means.[/b][/u] There is [i]absolutely nothing[/i] anyone can ever do about this, so we might as well accept it as a fact. Without firearms, there is practically no defense against guns, that's why they became so popular in the first place. Without guns, there is no way to defend ourselves from most criminals, who will invariably have a gun and probably has no qualms about using it. So yes, guns do have one utility: self-defense from other guns. It's sort of an ironic cycle that will probably never end but there's no sense stopping it now.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119597] [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] Well, good luck finding that black market, it's not like they are waving their arms and shouting "GET YOUR ILLEGAL FIREARMS HERE" No, you'd have to get into a lot of shit to get to them.[/QUOTE] Cause it's so hard to find somebody selling weed, right?

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119597] Well, good luck finding that black market, it's not like they are waving their arms and shouting "GET YOUR ILLEGAL FIREARMS HERE" No, you'd have to get into a lot of shit to get to them.[/QUOTE] lol you dont have to find them... thats what the internet is for silly. get a clue.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37119641]Cause it's so hard to find somebody selling weed, right?[/QUOTE] Yes, as stated before, just like illegal arms dealers they aren't waving their arms around going "BUY YOUR ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES HERE" You have to go into a lot of other shit to get there, just as I said earlier. Gang business and shit, really nasty stuff, crips and bloods and biker gangs and all that.

Why do people always act like gun crime=all crime. I know the UK has lower crime rates, but the US is constantly achieving record lows where the UK has increased/held steady. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;37119662]Yes, as stated before, just like illegal arms dealers they aren't waving their arms around going "BUY YOUR ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES HERE" You have to go into a lot of other shit to get there, just as I said earlier.[/QUOTE] Somehow I doubt the people buying illegal guns care about going through shit to get them.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;37119675]Hunting is still killing. Only a select few guns are specifically designed for sport and competition. A vast majority are designed to inflict as much as damage as possible on the victim. This is a really retarded analogy, people should stop using it. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] The UK has a much stricter gun control program and historically had one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom[/url] Before you pull the "UK and Germany has less people!", this is NOT how statistics work, and there is a reason why it is recorded "per 100,000 inhabitants" rather the total number of gun homicides committed.[/QUOTE] Guns are already here. How do you suggest we get the gun companies to leave and everyone to give up their guns? I agree that a world without guns might be a less painful one. But I will guarantee you most of american's wouldn't want give them up since its so long been a part of our culture.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;37119390]This is good news. Yall don't need assault rifles, and [B]shouldn't be able to easily obtain one[/B]. If you really want guns to protect yourself, or for sport, or whatever (which I disagree with too), you don't need an assault rifle. They are literally just for killing heaps of people really easily.[/QUOTE] If you are talking about actual assault rifles and not "assault weapons" then it is by no means easy to obtain. First off finding one is gonna be a pain in the ass considering they have to have been registered before 1986 and when you do find one it will be around 10,000 or more dollars. And then you have to send papers and shit to the ATF with 200 extra dollars and wait around 6 months for them to get you the permit and I might even be leaving out some steps.

[url=http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_vic-crime-total-victims] Yay Violent Crime Victims [/url]

[QUOTE=Marbalo;37119675]Hunting is still killing. Only a select few guns are specifically designed for sport and competition. A vast majority are designed to inflict as much as damage as possible on the victim. This is a really retarded analogy, people should stop using it. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] The UK has a much stricter gun control program and historically had one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom[/url] Before you pull the "UK and Germany has less people!", this is NOT how statistics work, and there is a reason why it is recorded "per 100,000 inhabitants" rather the total number of gun homicides committed.[/QUOTE] Okay so we get it, guns are bad, how is placing restrictions on legal trade of firearms going to accomplish anything? Also you're assuming that gun control is the only contributing factor to such low firearms related homicide rates. The UK doesn't have the same traditions of firearms ownership and production as the United States does, additionally the UK doesn't share a border with a nation as unstable as Mexico. And guess what, Mexico has restrictions on civilian firearm ownership which are much more severe than those in the US yet it still has a significantly higher homicide rate. If widespread gun ownership was truly the primary contributing factor to firearm homicides then Switzerland wouldn't have a lower homicide rate than Great Britain.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;37119796]I said gun homicides, not 'all crime'.[/QUOTE] That's because you took away one issue, and created another.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;37119783]Everyone knows you can't prevent and reduce crime down to a complete 100%. That isn't the point anyone is making. What people are saying is that you should have a strict gun control program because it [B]has been proven to work in other advanced, 1st world countries like yourself.[/B] Of course criminals will still be able to acquire guns, but enacting a stricter approach to it would mean that you would also prevent other psycopaths from going down to their local gun store and buying a bunch of weapons and then shooting up a theater the next day. Are you saying you can't give up your hobby just to see [I]even a glimpse[/I] of a reduction in crime? Maybe if you gave up your hobby, it would save a life or two. Do you not care at all? Is that a price you're actually willing to pay just so that you could go down to the range once in a week and shoot a bunch of targets? If your reasoning is self defense, I advise you to move to a new location, seeing as how you need a gun to keep yourself safe daily, which means your police force are really bad at preventing and deterring crime.[/QUOTE] Except it hasn't been proven to work. The UK is the most violent country in the EU, and it has the strictest gun control. Switzerland issues automatic rifles to every male aged 20 to 30, that they keep in their homes. They have laughably low gun crime. The District of Columbia has incredibly strict gun control laws, which didn't keep them from having 3 times the violent crime of any other state, with around 5 times the murders(this is scaled to population, per 100k I believe). [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Marbalo;37119796]I said gun homicides, not 'all crime'.[/QUOTE] If gun crime goes down but violent crime goes up then how has any problem been solved? The issue here isn't the guns, it's what's causing people to commit crimes in the first place. You remove the motivation, not the means. The means is frighteningly hard to control, if not impossible.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;37119796]I said gun homicides, not 'all crime'.[/QUOTE] The U.S murder rate is 4.7 to 1 thousand, less than the majority of 1st world countries. Hell, Sweden has 2 times our murder rate, did you know that? [url]http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita[/url] [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate[/url] is a better source

Why should a law-abiding citizen be completely defenseless to the whims of anyone willing to carry out violence for a period of time up to the discretion of the police? What is this "if someone breaks into your house hide and call the police, don't worry the robbers will be nice enough to act exactly as I think they should because every criminal is driven by identical motivations" bullshit running rampant in this thread?

[QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;37119569]By that logic we should ban knives because you can stab people with them and ban wrenches and hammers because you can hit people over the head with them.[/QUOTE] Every time there's a gun thread somebody makes this post and it sounds just as fucking stupid as it did on all the other threads. Guns aren't meant to be used for sport or anything other than killing them and owning a gun is serving no other purpose than compensating for their tiny little pricks. There's literally no reason a civilian should own a good at all, they have no use or need for one. [QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;37119856]The U.S murder rate is 4.7 to 1 thousand, less than the majority of 1st world countries. Hell, Sweden has 2 times our murder rate, did you know that? [url]http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita[/url] [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate[/url] is a better source[/QUOTE] Stop using shit wikipedia sources [url]https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByctosVIgSciMDJ2TkZMTzJhMlE/edit[/url]

[QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;37119856]The U.S murder rate is 4.7 to 1 million, less than the majority of 1st world countries. Hell, Sweden has 2 times our murder rate, did you know that? [url]http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita[/url][/QUOTE] Exactly this. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Homicide-world.png[/url] If you look at the map you'll notice that in the United States, the areas with the greatest homicide rates are those with the largest urban centers, with higher poverty rates, and which share a border with Mexico. [QUOTE=Marbalo;37119881]Mexico? When did this argument suddenly start being used? Are you saying that your border patrol is completely and utterly terrible at... patrolling the border? That the US is absolutely flooded with illegal, violent Mexican immigrants that you need a gun to protect yourself? Are you assuming that one day Mexican drug cartels will suddenly invade the US? This is a really bad justification. And yes, you are right. Guns [I]are [/I]a major part of American culture, but you have to keep in mind that this is not a good thing, since the US has the highest gun-homicide rate than any other civilized nation. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States#Rate_of_homicides_by_firearm[/url] This isn't a free get out of jail card when you throw you hands in the air and claim it's just part of your culture. You need to strive and change that culture. You need to at least try and make a difference, no matter how wishful thinking this might sounds. Because we are discussing lives here, and I believe that a nation should do everything in its power to prevent lives being lost, especially on account of such a petty reason as "its my hobby".[/QUOTE] I'm saying having a border with an unstable country is going to contribute a lot more to the trafficking of materials whether its drugs or firearms, illegal immigrants have nothing to do with it. The border patrol may be relatively effective but if it was 100% then there wouldn't be any illegal immigration or drug trade. Its easier to police your borders when you're surrounded with nothing but sea like with Great Britain and Japan. Also you seem to completely ignore anything other that the firearm homicide rate. The US may have a higher firearm homicide rate than other developed countries but it doesn't have a higher overall homicide rate. Firearms are just a tool, once you take them away people go back to using knives, bats, or anything else they can get their hands on. Again, putting restrictions on gun ownership by law abiding citizens accomplishes nothing. It's not about controlling the distribution of specific types of firearms, its about not allowing them into the hands of the wrong people, sweeping bans on the firearms themselves don't accomplish that.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;37119881]Mexico? When did this argument suddenly start being used? Are you saying that your border patrol is completely and utterly terrible at... patrolling the border? That the US is absolutely flooded with illegal, violent Mexican immigrants that you need a gun to protect yourself? Are you assuming that one day Mexican drug cartels will suddenly invade the US? This is a really bad justification. And yes, you are right. Guns [I]are [/I]a major part of American culture, but you have to keep in mind that this is not a good thing, since the US has the highest gun-homicide rate than any other civilized nation. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States#Rate_of_homicides_by_firearm[/url] This isn't a free get out of jail card when you throw you hands in the air and claim it's just part of your culture. You need to strive and change that culture. You need to at least try and make a difference, no matter how wishful thinking this might sounds. Because we are discussing lives here, and I believe that a nation should do everything in its power to prevent lives being lost, especially on account of such a petty reason as "its my hobby".[/QUOTE] Highest gun-homicide rate? What the fuck does it matter how a person was killed if they were killed? A source was just linked showing that the US actually has a pretty damn low murder rate.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37119831]Switzerland issues automatic rifles to every male aged 20 to 30, that they keep in their homes. They have laughably low gun crime.[/QUOTE] How the fuck are you going to rob a house with an automatic rifle?

If you have to ignore every other type of homicide to make it look like you're right, then fine. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;37119914]How the fuck are you going to rob a house with an automatic rifle?[/QUOTE] How are you going to commit mass murder with one? Oh wait, an automatic rifle is a perfect fit for mass murder. Funny how you never hear about crazed gunman in Switzerland though.

Of course gun homicide rates are going to be [i]slightly higher[/i], seeing as they are legal in the U.S. But over all, our homicide rates are much, much lower because we have guns to protect ourselves. I don't see how this isn't obvious.