Mayor Predicts “Waco-Style Standoff” In Response to Obama Gun Confiscation

[Craig Willmore]

[QUOTE=Megafan;39275325]Or we could, crazily enough, do more than one thing at a time.[/QUOTE]

no big tobacco legislation in 5 years but you want to tackle a less serious issue over night? almost seems like an agenda is being pushed or something heh

[Grenadiac]

[QUOTE=Van-man;39275334]Most illegal firearms started out as legal in one way or another.[/QUOTE]

Those firearms will continue to be bought and sold on the market, even if new illegal weapons magically stop being introduced, until they are all either confiscated or finally break completely from old age.

And take a look at the Khyber Pass gunsmiths. It's not hard to make firearms from scratch - they won't be terribly reliable, but they'll get the job done.

[Megafan]

[QUOTE=Craig Willmore;39275338]no big tobacco legislation in 5 years but you want to tackle a less serious issue over night? almost seems like an agenda is being pushed or something heh[/QUOTE]

I don't exactly have the ability to introduce bills to Congress, but considering that gun legislation is a bit more timely at the moment, that's why we're focusing on that. Some more big tobacco legislation would be nice too, but it isn't like we have to do one or the other.

[Van-man]

[QUOTE=teh pirate;39275342]Those firearms will continue to be bought and sold on the market, even if new illegal weapons magically stop being introduced, until they are all either confiscated or finally break completely from old age.[/QUOTE]

Well do you suggest the US waits even longer, so there's even more illegal guns?

The longer the wait, the harder it gets.

[Grenadiac]

[QUOTE=Van-man;39275355]Well do you suggest the US waits even longer, so there's even more illegal guns?

The longer the wait, the harder it gets.[/QUOTE]

You can't stop the introduction of weapons to the market without completely banning civilian firearms ownership. Even then, you won't stop it.

[rrkpp_]

[QUOTE=Craig Willmore;39275324][url=http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/]49,400 deaths per year from secondhand smoke exposure[/url][/QUOTE]

[url=http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm]31,672 injuries per year from firearms[/url]

ignoring (once again), the fact that we can do multiple things at once (lets get rid of secondhand smoke and enforce gun control! woohoo!), how do you even conclusively determine someone dies of secondhand smoke? it says the majority of those secondhand smoke deaths (33k or something) are caused by heart disease which is ridiculously common. i'd be really interested to see how they conclude the death was directly caused by secondhand smoke lol

[Grenadiac]

Anyhow I'm going to bed, gentlemen

[rrkpp_]

[QUOTE=teh pirate;39275368]You can't stop the introduction of weapons to the market without completely banning civilian firearms ownership. Even then, you won't stop it.[/QUOTE]

no but pretending that effective gun control won't slow that flow of those weapons into the market is childish and purposefully ignorant.

[Craig Willmore]

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39275374]

(lets get rid of secondhand smoke and enforce gun control! woohoo!)[/QUOTE]

let's do it.

[Van-man]

[QUOTE=teh pirate;39275368]You can't stop the introduction of weapons to the market without completely banning civilian firearms ownership. Even then, you won't stop it.[/QUOTE]

The point is to starve a oversaturated market.
There'll always be illegal firearms, but the point is to drive up the black market price so a petty criminals can't afford to acquire one.

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=Van-man;39275401]The point is to starve a oversaturated market.
There'll always be illegal firearms, but the point is to drive up the black market price so a petty criminals can't afford to acquire one.[/QUOTE]

So close factories and businesses that operate in America to "stem" the tide of weapons and hurt the economy for at least a good long while?

[Craig Willmore]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39275405]So close factories and businesses that operate in America to "stem" the tide of weapons and hurt the economy for at least a good long while?[/QUOTE]

and temporarily increase gun crime if the UK was any indication

[Grenadiac]

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39275381]no but pretending that effective gun control won't slow that flow of those weapons into the market is childish and purposefully ignorant.[/QUOTE]

I'm not doing this

[editline]19th January 2013[/editline]

what I am doing is going to bed now, for real!

[Valnar]

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39274979]golly maybe i don't actually hate guns! maybe i just think it's ridiculous to think that a casual hobby is worth the loss of thousands of human lives every year!! imagine that![/QUOTE]

You said that you weren't demonizing gun owners, but you are attributing a selfishness on gun owners and saying that their hobby is in some way causing the loss of life.

[Roger Waters]

[QUOTE=catbarf;39258939]The hobby argument is a really poor one IMO. The idea that you should be allowed to own something just because it's fun to have and use, while firearms are used in all sorts of crime and cause the deaths of enormous numbers of people, comes across as callous at best.

I think the need for self-defense and the intended principle of the second amendment are much stronger cases for guns than the fact that they're fun to have.[/QUOTE]

the same goes for knives, poopdeck.

[rrkpp_]

[QUOTE=Valnar;39275458]You said that you weren't demonizing gun owners, but you are attributing a selfishness on gun owners and saying that their hobby is in some way causing the loss of life.[/QUOTE]

do me a solid and read the rest of the conversation where i completely explain who i'm addressing with that comment and why

[catbarf]

[QUOTE=Roger Waters;39275488]the same goes for knives, poopdeck.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, and surprise, if someone suggests banning knives the rational response is 'but there are good reasons to own knives', not 'but collecting and using knives is fun for me'.

[Ganerumo]

So apart from the debate on whatever you guys are beating the fuck out of each other about, is anyone really agreeing with the law itself ?

Because limiting the amount of ammunition in a magazine sounds pretty retarded. Mostly because magazines tend to be the one thing you can change to improve capacity relatively easily.

[KnightSolaire]

And every European is just sat reading this thread and sighing.

[Van-man]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39275405]So close factories and businesses that operate in America to "stem" the tide of weapons and hurt the economy for at least a good long while?[/QUOTE]

Short term problem with a long term solution.

[Nigademus]

[QUOTE=KnightSolaire;39275878]And every European is just sat reading this thread and sighing.[/QUOTE]

Newsflash: we don't give a fuck if you guys don't give a fuck about our national problems.

[editline]efa[/editline]

Take your apathy and stick it where the sun don't shine.

[Raidyr]

[QUOTE=KnightSolaire;39275878]And every European is just sat reading this thread and sighing.[/QUOTE]

So kinda that same feeling I get when I read horribly racist shit in gypsy threads?

[HumanAbyss]

[QUOTE=catbarf;39275549]Yeah, and surprise, if someone suggests banning knives the rational response is 'but there are good reasons to own knives', not 'but collecting and using knives is fun for me'.[/QUOTE]

I know several people who do this.

It's a valid reason when it harms no one.

[editline]19th January 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=Van-man;39275907]Short term problem with a long term solution.[/QUOTE]

i'm not so sure.

[Fulgrim]

[QUOTE=KnightSolaire;39275878]And every European is just sat reading this thread and sighing.[/QUOTE]

You dont speak for me.
Gun control is the one issue on wich havent decided what side of the discussion i agree with.
i find these threads very intresting. that being said-
i really hope no cops get shot over this, surely people will understand the police arent some evil force of darkness here to steal their guns, they are just doing their jobs.

[Fulgrim]

Your posts didnt seem stupid at all. I guess people mistake "dumb" for "dissagree" from time to time.

[BFG9000]

[QUOTE=Rusty100;39274759]Are you willingly that blind? The reason guns exist, was because we needed a way to kill eachother easier. Years and years later, some of them are used for sport. As a secondary purpose. The reason you have the gun you have was because they were created, for murdering. And whether or not you use it for sport does not negate it's ability as a deadly weapon. One that, I stress, is designed to kill people.
If your gun really was created to shoot at paper targets, it wouldn't be very powerful at all. It'd have only the power required to pierce paper!
But I'm guessing whatever bullets you use are a lot more capable than that. (Hint: they're designed to pierce flesh).[/QUOTE]

Let's assume just for a second that this Earth was a peaceful world as it grew up, everyone tolerates everyone and loves sucking each others' dicks and eating each other out

Let's say that guns were invented during this time. And their purpose would be for competition shooting. Does that still make it an object designed to kill? It has the CAPACITY to kill, but it was made with different intentions than that.
And don't give me that "It'd only have the power to pierce paper" bullshit; as technology advances in this utopian piece of shit of a world, people are going to want to develop more powerful, accurate, precise, and ranged versions of these competition shooters. And fuck me but a BB gun can only have so much range.

[editline]19th January 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=Fort83;39279906] those who [i]jump the gun[/i] so to speak.
[/QUOTE]

heh
Heheh
HEHEHEHEH
HUEHUEHEU GUFFAQWSDFWEC

[hovergroovie]

I use ratings to gauge how stupid people are. They throw a dumb on everything you say when they disagree, and I SWEAR that when I picture them clicking the dumb button, they're actually smirking and giving themselves a high five.

I honestly believe that it's like an inventory. It lists the names of the people who use a prefab button to back their point so they can feel like they contribute, while still avoiding putting their point out there. Even funnier still, is they then worry about what ratings they will receive.

I'm all for it personally. Stick to rating, and let the adults hash out the issues.

[BFG9000]

[QUOTE=hovergroovie;39281436]I use ratings to gauge how stupid people are. They throw a dumb on everything you say when they disagree, and I SWEAR that when I picture them clicking the dumb button, they're actually smirking and giving themselves a high five.

I honestly believe that it's like an inventory. It lists the names of the people who use a prefab button to back their point so they can feel like they contribute, while still avoiding putting their point out there. Even funnier still, is they then worry about what ratings they will receive.

I'm all for it personally. Stick to rating, and let the adults hash out the issues.[/QUOTE]

but what if you're rating AND contributing?

[Paul McCartney]

[QUOTE=BFG9000;39281443]but what if you're rating AND contributing?[/QUOTE]

The way I see it. If you disagree with someone, press disagree. I only give someone a dumb rating if they say something like, "You can't cook a taco with a gun!"

[Zillamaster55]

[QUOTE=hovergroovie;39281436]I use ratings to gauge how stupid people are. They throw a dumb on everything you say when they disagree, and I SWEAR that when I picture them clicking the dumb button, they're actually smirking and giving themselves a high five.

I honestly believe that it's like an inventory. It lists the names of the people who use a prefab button to back their point so they can feel like they contribute, while still avoiding putting their point out there. Even funnier still, is they then worry about what ratings they will receive.

I'm all for it personally. Stick to rating, and let the adults hash out the issues.[/QUOTE]

Wow, you sure are concerned about pixels