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

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39264616]Well automobiles are inanimate objects too. They're also powerful objects capable of causing harm if the wrong people are allowed to use them, much like firearms. We wouldn't trust habitual drunks and children to drive automobiles, so why shouldn't we disallow some people from acquiring and using firearms as well?[/QUOTE] also, cars are basically a fact of life - you need them to get to places, which is why getting your license revoked permanently is kind of a big deal. a gun does not carry you from one side of a country to the other and its usage doesn't make the world go round, unless of course you're a cynical old fuck.

[QUOTE=Cone;39264669]also, cars are basically a fact of life - you need them to get to places, which is why getting your license revoked permanently is kind of a big deal. a gun does not carry you from one side of a country to the other and its usage doesn't make the world go round, unless of course you're a cynical old fuck.[/QUOTE] Weapons are also a fact of life, they have existed as long as we have.

anyone else here hype for the 2nd civil war?!

[QUOTE=Krubbmeister;39264698]Weapons are also a fact of life, they have existed as long as we have.[/QUOTE] Though with the advent of the 21st century they're largely not needed anymore. Back in ye olde days with no form for proper law enforcement or no easy way to acquire food they were a necessity. But nowadays most of those purposes have either been eliminated, or reduced to a hobby status, due to better alternatives & solutions. [QUOTE=RoadOfGirl;39264708]anyone else here hype for the 2nd civil war?![/QUOTE] It'll only be rednecks.

[QUOTE=Van-man;39264737]Though with the advent of the 21st century they're largely not needed anymore. Back in ye olde days with no form for proper law enforcement or no easy way to acquire food they were a necessity. But nowadays most of those purposes have either been eliminated, or reduced to a hobby status, due to better alternatives & solutions. [/QUOTE] Then why do a lot of women carry pepperspray?

Facepunch is so childish and ill informed on both sides of this debate.

[QUOTE=cyanidem;39264849]Facepunch is so childish and ill informed on both sides of this debate.[/QUOTE] well why don't you post so that you could share your wisdom with us

[QUOTE=Krubbmeister;39264752]Then why do a lot of women carry pepperspray?[/QUOTE] Because it's one of those alternatives? No to mention the physical difference between a woman and a man.

[QUOTE=cyanidem;39264849]Facepunch is so childish and ill informed on both sides of this debate.[/QUOTE] This post is massively less useful than the majority of posts in this thread. I doubt you'll follow it up with anything of value

[QUOTE=cyanidem;39264849]Facepunch is so childish and ill informed on both sides of this debate.[/QUOTE] And posts like this do nothing to aid or inform either side of the debate, thanks.

This is stupid, I feel sorry for the Law enforcement officials that have to place their lives on the line even more because of this ban.

[QUOTE=MuTAnT;39264633]I don't think you can really make a call like that without citing at least one study. You can't just make your own facts up, that's why I said I couldn't make a call either way.[/QUOTE] I could have sworn people have already posted these statistics in the many other gun control debates that have occurred in SH. I could be wrong, but I see no reason to reiterate a point that's been reiterated multiple times before, yet has passed from our goldfish-like memory. [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=-n3o-;39267466]This is stupid, I feel sorry for the Law enforcement officials that have to place their lives on the line even more because of this ban.[/QUOTE] Ironically, they forgot to exempt law enforcement officials from the magazine capacity ban. :v: [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39267432]And posts like this do nothing to aid or inform either side of the debate, thanks.[/QUOTE] Do any posts? No one ever changes sides, so is there really a point to it all?

It's too late for there to be no guns in murrica if they wanted that they should have done it loooooooooonng ago the most they could do now is make it extremely difficult for people to get guns or ban hand guns and just leave everything else which can't be concealed but is still useful for home defense.

[QUOTE=Craig Willmore;39264406]reread what I wrote reread it twice reread it again then stop posting. you are literally 10000% more likely to be killed by an automobile. [/QUOTE] Yes, because automobiles were designed with their primary purpose being to make things dead, and don't have a whole lot of practical application outside of making things dead.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;39264573]Well if they went to confiscate his computer he wouldn't actually be complaining because he wouldn't have a computer to rant on now would he [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] Not making advanced automatic weaponry as easily accessible to everyone as it currently is would also be of help. Don't get me wrong I think education is the best way to solve a lot of issues in American society right now, but you also have to keep in mind that a crazy mind will not necessarily be taken in charge before it does something stupid. There's a reason most people who are taken in charge in mental institutes have already tried to kill themselves BEFORE they got in there. That's because you need to see something out of the ordinary to suspect someone has a mental issue. So in short just teaching people how to properly use firearms and give them the best education system ever as well as a good mental health care system would not be enough. If someone who is not in his right mind is on the verge of going to a school and shooting everyone with an automatic rifle, the fact he can get an assault rifle completely legally just by walking into a store may as well tip him on the wrong side of the balance. This kind of case will always happen even if you limit the sales of firearms to, say, handguns, but at least they will be rarer and probably not as deadly considering the amount of ammunition you can carry in a handgun is rather limited. My point is, you can't just hope for education to make everything. Some rules have to come by as well. Now the big issue is to find rules that find balance between restriction and freedom.[/QUOTE] Dude, you can't get an assault rifle in that manner. They cost upwards of $10,000, you get an extensive background check done, you pay the atf $200, talk to the local sheriff, and wait for a few months for the paperwork to clear.

Yeah, my biggest grievance with most gun control advocates is the things they base their arguments on are just [i]wrong[/i]. Shit like confusing 'assault weapons' with automatic rifles or machine guns.

I intend to keep educating posters on that point, until all of facepunch understands the difference.

[QUOTE=DarkMonkey;39268719]Yeah, my biggest grievance with most gun control advocates is the things they base their arguments on are just [i]wrong[/i]. Shit like confusing 'assault weapons' with automatic rifles or machine guns.[/QUOTE] Thats the point of calling certain semi-auotmatics "assault weapons". By calling them that, the uninformed will think that they're capable of automatic fire and they'll be for banning such weapons.

What about guns that have been past down through families, are they protected by some sort of grandfather clause? [QUOTE=Clavus;39259026]The thing is, if you don't need it / it's no longer relevant, and it's becoming a thorn in the eye for a lot of people, why not do away with it. And the problem isn't necessarily people like you. The problem is weapons are dangerous and pretty damn good at killing things if something goes wrong. We have a lot of laws in society to restrict people from creating potential hazards. From speeding to [b]owning a fully grown alligator in the suburbs.[/b] The restrictions on guns is mainly an attack on gun culture for most people. [/QUOTE] Not really important to the debate but I think with proper facilities and permits you can totally keep gators in the suburbs. A friend of mine has a caiman he purchased legally.

[QUOTE=Ryukrawr?;39264554]"From my cold dead hands"[/QUOTE] Whenever I see this quote, I'm reminded of the onion: [url]http://www.theonion.com/articles/right-to-own-handheld-device-that-shoots-deadly-me,30742/[/url] :v: [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=DarkMonkey;39268719]Yeah, my biggest grievance with most gun control advocates is the things they base their arguments on are just [i]wrong[/i]. Shit like confusing 'assault weapons' with automatic rifles or machine guns.[/QUOTE] Hey, don't judge all gun control advocates on the few uninformed that argue for it. I don't judge all pro-gun people on the actions of the people that threaten to shoot anyone that tries to take their guns or the crazies in the NRA. [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Apache249;39264115]If there's no cause, why take something away from many law-abiding citizens? [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] Prohibition doesn't work. We've seen this in alcohol, and we're seeing this with Marijuana. Attempting to take guns away would lead to a bloodbath.[/QUOTE] A lot of people bring up prohibition of marijuana when talking about banning guns, it's a seemingly valid argument, but my friend had a pretty good rebuttal for it. "If I really want to I can grow weed in my house, I can't grow an assault rifle."

You can machine one though, essentially the same thing.

The highest murder rate in national history was between 1846 and 1887. Gee. I wonder did they have semi automatic "assault rifles" or "high capacity magazines" between 1846 and 1887? I think not. Source: [url]http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-19/lifestyle/35929227_1_homicide-rate-randolph-roth-gun-control[/url]

[QUOTE=johnlmonkey;39269507] A lot of people bring up prohibition of marijuana when talking about banning guns, it's a seemingly valid argument, but my friend had a pretty good rebuttal for it. "If I really want to I can grow weed in my house, I can't grow an assault rifle."[/QUOTE] Except you can make a sten machine gun out of parts from your local Home Depot or Lowes in your garage. Plans and blueprints for it are all over the internet. I could also point to the person who made an AK-47 out of a shovel he bought at a flea market. That's not a very valid rebuttal.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39269684]Except you can make a sten machine gun out of parts from your local Home Depot or Lowes in your garage. Plans and blueprints for it are all over the internet. I could also point to the person who made an AK-47 out of a shovel he bought at a flea market. That's not a very valid rebuttal.[/QUOTE] Except the guy who made an AK out of that is a gunsmith and an experienced machinist. A person could make a sten out of basic materials, they'd still need to know basic gunsmithing and manufacturing, along with how to properly follow schematics, which most people would rather put aside and just buy a gun instead of dealing with it.

[QUOTE=counterpo0;39261294]Theres been 3 mass shootings this year. All three had "assault weapons" ( doesn't matter if they used them or not still had them IE: Sandy Hook) If you look here at FBI.gov [URL]http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20[/URL] You will see that rifles were hardly used in murders, and that handguns are more of a problem. I am against all types of gun bans, but banning " Assault Weapons" is pretty stupid if they aren't used in a majority of crimes. I mean look at California 1,790 murders in 2011, 866 of them were handgun, 45 were rifles. Oh but wait California already has a "assault weapons ban" (AWB), so surely a state, lets say Texas who doesn't have an AWB has higher Rifle crime: 1,089 murders 497 handguns, 37 rifles. Well shit.[/QUOTE] About 0.0000012 rifle murders per capita in california Also about 0.0000015 rifle murders per capita in texas. It's not much of a difference, for such different forms of control.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;39256522]"They're actually stealing property from citizens? Holy shit good on 'em." What you just said was stupid.[/QUOTE] enjoy your dead kids

[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] Wow, I cannot seriously believe pro-gun people are rating this dumb. Really guys? Are you telling me that when anti-gun advocates point out how many people are killed a year because of firearms, the [I]first defense you come up with[/I] is 'But guns are my hobby!'? That is a [B]terrible[/B] defense of firearms. Want to know some good arguments instead? Try the pointlessness of a firearms ban in a country with almost as many guns as people. Try the need for citizens to be armed against criminals who, thanks to the drug trade, have the cash to afford substantial hardware. Try the intended purpose of the second amendment, and what it means for a country as a whole. Try the lack of correlation between violent crime and gun ownership. Try the comparative success of armed states like Israel and Switzerland in combating crime. These are all solid, well-documented arguments, and they're why I am indisputably 100% pro-gun. But 'it's a hobby' is a damn dumb argument. Maybe my hobby is collecting nerve agents. Maybe my hobby is building nuclear reactors. Maybe my hobby is designing and amassing my own explosives. But nobody cares that it's my hobby when talking about criminalization, because my enjoyment of a specific hobby is much less important than the public well-being. If I said anyone should be allowed to collect Zyklon B because arranging jars of it on a shelf is [I]fun[/I], you'd tell me to find a new hobby, just as anti-gun advocates are. Putting your own entertainment over the lives of innocents makes you look like an asshole. There are much, MUCH better arguments for guns that don't involve borderline psychopathy.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39269684]Except you can make a sten machine gun out of parts from your local Home Depot or Lowes in your garage. Plans and blueprints for it are all over the internet. I could also point to the person who made an AK-47 out of a shovel he bought at a flea market. That's not a very valid rebuttal.[/QUOTE] I think it is, marijuana is naturally growing, its a plant. It takes next to no knowledge to grow, building a gun is far more difficult. [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39269948]enjoy your dead kids[/QUOTE] Again, I'm pro gun control but you have no idea what you're talking about mate. This is not how to debate someone.

[QUOTE=johnlmonkey;39269507]Whenever I see this quote, I'm reminded of the onion: [url]http://www.theonion.com/articles/right-to-own-handheld-device-that-shoots-deadly-me,30742/[/url] :v: [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] Hey, [del]don't[/del] [B][I]we should[/I][/B] judge [del]all[/del] [B]most[/B] gun control advocates on the [del]few[/del] [B]Majority[/B] uninformed that argue for it. [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] [/QUOTE] Fix'd :v: [editline]18th January 2013[/editline] You yourself aren't uninformed, but but misinformed like many advocates are today. Media sensationalism, "scarification" of firearms terms and emotional attacks have brought many people to argue for banning guns And surprise surprise, they make themselves look idiotic when they do

[QUOTE=BFG9000;39270042]Fix'd :v:[/QUOTE] If we're going to start judging each other based on the idiots that argue our positions, the pro-gun side isn't looking good. :v: [img]http://www.demotivationalposters.net/image/demotivational-poster/0808/white-trash-redneck-white-trash-gun-trailer-demotivational-poster-1217614619.jpg[/img] Now, stop making generalizations.