Georgia courthouse shooter had bombs, assault rifle, sheriff says - Polidicks

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034499]state by state bans don't work for obvious reasons and isn't a real argument[/QUOTE] Thing is, blanket bans and confiscations are the only things that current anti-gun politicians seem to care about, yet you wonder why we oppose most gun control laws they've tried to pass in the last years.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034520]Thing is, blanket bans and confiscations are the only things that current anti-gun politicians seem to care about, yet you wonder why we oppose most gun control laws they've tried to pass in the last years.[/QUOTE] They're the only thing that work. [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control[/url]

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034507]nope are you saying that access to firearms isn't a problem? At all? It is?[/QUOTE] So are you saying they should be confiscated, or what

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45034535]why don't we focus on poverty and healthcare, that way we can just get shit done?[/QUOTE] because the same right wing lobbies that block gun control also don't want to see healthcare expanded and poor people looked after

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034537]So are you saying they should be confiscated, or what[/QUOTE] I don't think that is a currently workable solution for the problem. But I recognize the problem does exist, nor am I willing to pretend that it isn't problem to stop offending the delicate sensibilities of some hobbyists. [editline]8th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=ilikecorn;45034546]Digging the opinion piece as a source.[/QUOTE] digging one of the most respected opinion piece magazines in the world

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034536]They're the only thing that work.[/QUOTE] What, you've got to be fucking shitting me now. First you say you've never advocated them, now you say they're the only thing that work. Honestly, what the fuck

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034566]What, you've got to be fucking shitting me now. First you say you've never advocated them, now you say they're the only thing that work. Honestly, what the fuck[/QUOTE] was the article a little too complicated for you? sorry not sorry

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034536][url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control[/url][/QUOTE] [quote]And banning all guns is not about to happen (and good luck collecting all 300m guns currently in circulation, should such a law be passed). It would also not be democratic. I personally dislike guns. [b]I think the private ownership of guns is a tragic mistake.[/b] But a majority of Americans disagree with me, some of them very strongly. And at a certain point, when very large majorities disagree with you, a bit of deference is in order. So in short I am not sure that tinkering with gun control will stop horrible massacres like today’s. And I am pretty sure that the sort of gun control that would work—banning all guns—is not going to happen. So I have a feeling that even a more courageous debate than has been heard for some time, with Mr Obama proposing gun-control laws that would have been unthinkable in his first term, will not change very much at all.[/quote] So you posted an article that, apart from the highlighted part, agrees with our arguments.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45034555] Digging the fact that it's still an opinion piece with no cited sources or research.[/QUOTE] you haven't cited a single thing in this entire damn thread lmao [editline]8th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034591]So you posted an article that, apart from the highlighted part, agrees with our arguments.[/QUOTE] It reflects my personal argument, not yours lmao. Give the whole thing another read.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034571]was the article a little too complicated for you?[/QUOTE] I was referring to what you said about blanket bans and confiscations being the only thing that works, you twit.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034604]I was referring to what you said about blanket bans and confiscations being the only thing that works, you twit.[/QUOTE] "I don't think that is a currently workable solution for the problem." can't you read?

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034593]It reflects my personal argument, not yours lmao. Give the whole thing another read.[/QUOTE] And yet in the end says everything proposed so far would do jack squat. Proving us right.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034631]And yet in the end says everything proposed so far would do jack squat. Proving us right.[/QUOTE] All the article is saying is that firearms in the USA are part of the problem but the problem is so severe that there is no longer an easy solution to it. I'm inclined to agree with it. All I've done in this thread is attack those who are willing to pretend that firearms are not a problem at all.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034615]"I don't think that is a currently workable solution for the problem."[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;45034536]They're the only thing that work.[/QUOTE] Huh, I'm getting mixed messages here. [QUOTE]can't you read?[/QUOTE] Yes [quote]And banning all guns is not about to happen (and good luck collecting all 300m guns currently in circulation, should such a law be passed). It would also not be democratic.[/quote]

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034653]Huh, I'm getting mixed messages here. Yes[/QUOTE] Yes hypothetically, not in practice. Just as the article said that hypothetically its the only solution but it can't work because of the hurdles put up infront of it. Are things clearer now? Does the article make more sense with thinking that ownership is a tragic mistake but there are no longer any easy solutions?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45034672]Hurdles like the fact that it's illegal. Are things clearer now?[/QUOTE] what is legal and what is illegal change all the time. (such as slavery)

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034646]All I've done in this thread is attack[/QUOTE] Yeah, we could see that. Instead of saying something useful. [QUOTE]those who are willing to pretend that firearms are not a problem at all.[/QUOTE] Listen mate, gun violence is a thing, we get it. But I still don't get why you're laughing at those proposing trying to fix poverty instead (a thing that would help with much more than just reducing the issue with violence) and still say that the only solution would be something completely impossible, even though better solutions have been successfully implemented elsewhere.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;45034699]Listen mate, gun violence is a thing, we get it. But I still don't get why you're laughing at those proposing trying to fix poverty instead (a thing that would help with much more than just reducing the issue with violence) and still say that the only solution would be something completely impossible, even though better solutions have been successfully implemented elsewhere.[/QUOTE] I was just lauging at the hypocrisy of someone saying that there is no overnight solution to gun problems then in the same breathe saying there is an overnight solution to poverty.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034666]hypothetically its the only solution but it can't work because of [b]the hurdles put up infront of it[/b].[/QUOTE] Wouldn't call "being fucking impossible and antidemocratic" a simple "hurdle put up in front of it". [QUOTE]ownership is a tragic mistake[/QUOTE] Not. [QUOTE]but there are no longer any easy solutions?[/QUOTE] "Oh no, the easy-button solution is useless! Damn, now we should have to revert to the complex ones that would instead do something meaningful, like fixing poverty. Man, fuck that shit" [QUOTE=NoDachi;45034695](such as slavery)[/QUOTE] Ah, quit it already with that piss poor excuse of an argument. It makes you sound even more of a holier-than-thou wanker.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034712]I was just lauging at the hypocrisy of someone saying that there is no overnight solution to gun problems then in the same breathe saying there is an overnight solution to poverty.[/QUOTE] Nobody called fixing poverty and healthcare an overnight solution, you dimwit. Yes, it'd be hella complex and expensive, but it'd be the best scenario for everyone. Yet you keep going on about how it wouldn't do shit because it wouldn't be instant, all while saying that the only thing that works is downright impossible. What even is your goal? What would you like the US to do that's both quick and actually feasible without recurring to a wizard turning all the guns into teddy bears or something [editline]8th June 2014[/editline] Because really, everything you've said so far boils down to "America sucks and there's nothing you yanks can do about it, neener neener neener. Also owning guns is as bad as torturing people you've kidnapped into doing your bidding."

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45034535]The fed's banned "assault weapons" in 1994. It did nothing to further reduce crime, as crime was, and still is, on the downslope. It wasn't a state by state ban. It was a no shit federal ban. And it didn't work. I wonder why. Furthermore, SCOTUS has already declared, and re-affirmed time and time again that civilian ownership of weaponry is, infact, legal. So again, rather than shit all over the SCOTUS, the constitution, and the people, why don't we focus on poverty and healthcare, that way we can just get shit done?[/QUOTE] The problem was that this ban really only went after assault rifles, (AK family look a likes or AR series.) With the exception of extended pistol magazines or handguns that were easy to convert to fully automatic, such as the TEC-DC9, were truly effected. So the issue of easy to conceal firearms was never truly resolved.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034305] The only difference is access to firearms[/QUOTE] But that's wrong. [editline]9th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=NoDachi;45034417]lmao[/QUOTE] stop this

[QUOTE=NoDachi;45034571]was the article a little too complicated for you? sorry not sorry[/QUOTE] Why are you such a condescending shitwad? Like, really? Every single post I've ever seen by you is just a snide, bitchy remark. Grow up

[QUOTE=w00tf1zh;45026875]Typical gun-nut defense. Read my other post and that is all im saying in the matter.[/QUOTE] Gah, your ban is perfectly legitimate. [img]http://puu.sh/9mCkh/39ef49e8b4.png[/img]