• Democrats to pursue assault weapons ban, as Sandy Hook Elementary 'unlikely to re-open'
    232 replies, posted
[QUOTE=laserguided;38852763]Ban gasoline, it can burn down a house.[/QUOTE] Most guns in the world are made to kill. Gasoline isn't. I don't get the american boner for guns, you guys should give some more value to human life.
[QUOTE=FlyingDog;38853590]Are you seriously suggesting letting teachers keep firearms around inquisitive children? That's just asking for it.[/QUOTE] Not necessarily teacher but possibly other staff it security. But in order to do so they should be held to higher standards of training and mental health given the environment.
[QUOTE=Splash Attack;38853610]Not necessarily teacher but possibly other staff it security. But in order to do so they should be held to higher standards of training and mental health given the environment.[/QUOTE] I'm more concerned with some dumbfuck child getting ahold of one and doing something reckless. Granted, they could probably get one somewhere else, but why make it easier?
While it is true that there is no way to legislate away the 300 million guns already in the country, some form of Federal stricter gun control is needed AS WELL AS increased mental health care and education about guns. I agree with the idea what we need to do something, but we cannot simply copy successful countries like the UK, where there have been only 40 fatalities in 2012. Gun control works over there because there are very few guns in the hands of the people. We are Americans, we will think of something creative to divide our gun fatalities by ten in some creative manner that does not involve Europe/Japan style gun control. The real idiots are the ones who want to keep the status quo.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;38853533]It's not intended to become tyrannical, it's just a failsafe if it does Have you just not read the bill of rights or what[/QUOTE] I have. Except it isn't infallible.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38853662]I have. Except it isn't infallible.[/QUOTE] Holy shit. It's not supposed to be infallible, both the constitution and the bill of rights are both guidelines. do you honestly think we were supposed to follow them to the very last idea? no, that's why there's open clauses.
[QUOTE=FlyingDog;38853617]I'm more concerned with some dumbfuck child getting ahold of one and doing something reckless. Granted, they could probably get one somewhere else, but why make it easier?[/QUOTE] Well obviously there would need to be precautions in that respect. Like I said, I would probably limit it more to security type staff or even just limit where they can be kept.
[QUOTE=Zarjk;38853688]Holy shit. It's not supposed to be infallible, both the constitution and the bill of rights are both guidelines. do you honestly think we were supposed to follow them to the very last idea? no, that's why there's open clauses.[/QUOTE] If they are guidelines, why do people cite the constitution as being the ultimate law of the land which cannot be broken?
[QUOTE=draugur;38853544]Ban water, it's the leading cause of drowning. On a more productive note, why not just train teachers to use firearms and let them keep them in their desk or something? Surely that'd be a better solution?[/QUOTE] holy shit we are having this conversation again.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38853662]I have. Except it isn't infallible.[/QUOTE] So if we ever end up having a shitty government, what should we do? Picket government buildings? That worked really well for China.
-snip-
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38853746]If they are guidelines, why do people cite the constitution as being the ultimate law of the land which cannot be broken?[/QUOTE] because some people are fucking idiots.
[QUOTE=Hatley;38853783]I think it's obvious that even if guns aren't outlawed full stop, things need to at least be stricter. There's been 2 goddamn shootings in the same year, surely that indicates that the second amendment may no longer be the greatest idea.[/QUOTE] Because the guns told them to kill people, right? We could always, I dunno, actually give healthcare to the mentally ill to stop this from happening. Banning guns because of stuff like this would be like banning ammonia because it's an ingredient in mustard gas.
[QUOTE=Hatley;38853783]I think it's obvious that even if guns aren't outlawed full stop, things need to at least be stricter. There's been 2 goddamn shootings in the same year, surely that indicates that the second amendment may no longer be the greatest idea.[/QUOTE] Except the 2nd amendment isn't even the problem here. Can this argument be any more fucking circular?
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;38853778]So if we ever end up having a shitty government, what should we do? Picket government buildings? That worked really well for China.[/QUOTE] why don't you try voting
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38853868]why don't you try voting[/QUOTE] Because it is basically a two party system. Either one shit right side wins or the other more center-right shit side wins.
Can I ask - WHY would a person even need an assault weapon in the first place? I can understand a simple little handgun for emergencies - maybe even a simple rifle/shotgun for hunting, but why an assault weapon?
-snip-
[QUOTE=Kwigg;38853911]Can I ask - WHY would a person even need an assault weapon in the first place? I can understand a simple little handgun for emergencies - maybe even a simple rifle/shotgun for hunting, but why an assault weapon?[/QUOTE] Again: It wasn't an assault weapon, nice try.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38853933]Again: It wasn't an assault weapon, nice try.[/QUOTE] I wasn't blaming the assault weapon, I was asking a question. [QUOTE=Tacosheller;38853970]Why would a person need television or video games or weed it's not always a need, there's this thing called target shooting Gun enthusiasts are angry at legislation like this because you're taking away their hobby, you're reprimanding responsible gun owners for the actions of a few mentally ill people[/QUOTE] Oh right, should've thought of that really, thanks though.
[QUOTE=Kwigg;38853911]Can I ask - WHY would a person even need an assault weapon in the first place? I can understand a simple little handgun for emergencies - maybe even a simple rifle/shotgun for hunting, but why an assault weapon?[/QUOTE] Why would a person need television or video games or weed it's not always a need, there's this thing called target shooting Gun enthusiasts are angry at legislation like this because you're taking away their hobby, you're reprimanding responsible gun owners for the actions of a few mentally ill people
[QUOTE=Kwigg;38853911]Can I ask - WHY would a person even need an assault weapon in the first place? I can understand a simple little handgun for emergencies - maybe even a simple rifle/shotgun for hunting, but why an assault weapon?[/QUOTE] Assault weapons are not automatic, the only difference between an assault weapon and a semi-auto hunting rifle is the look and maybe the magazine size.
[QUOTE=Hatley;38853930]So you think we should give the killers nice and easy access to the weapons?[/QUOTE] I'm saying we should stop killers from existing in the first place. If you treat people with the potential to do these things, then there's no need to take guns away from responsible owners. I'm going to say it, the shooter's mother was an irresponsible gun owner. I personally think if you own a gun, you should have to own a safe so you can keep them out of reach of children and the mentally ill. If she had a safe, this either wouldn't have happened or he would have found another way.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;38853970]Why would a person need television or video games or weed it's not always a need, there's this thing called target shooting Gun enthusiasts are angry at legislation like this because you're taking away their hobby, you're reprimanding responsible gun owners for the actions of a few mentally ill people[/QUOTE] Can you easily kill 20 people in 10 seconds with a television? no What about weed? no Hmm, maybe with video games? yeah sure why not I don't think all the gun crimes in your country are made by "few mentally ill people". If somebody's hobby is to use assault weapons or whatever to fire at some targets, I suggest them to get a new hobby.
[QUOTE=Uberpro;38854056]Can you easily kill 20 people in 10 seconds with a television? no What about weed? no Hmm, maybe with video games? yeah sure why not I don't think all the gun crimes in your country are made by "few mentally ill people". If somebody's hobby is to use assault weapons or whatever to fire at some targets, I suggest them to get a new hobby.[/QUOTE] That's like telling you to get a new hobby instead of games because some people bully people over the internet
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;38854094]That's like telling you to get a new hobby instead of games because some people bully people over the internet[/QUOTE] No, no it's not.
With the amount of gun saturation in America, a weapons ban will only punish the responsible users. An exceedingly large percentage of gun crime is committed with illegally owned firearms, so all weapons banning will do is punish the responsible. Also, fixing the terrible state of mental healthcare in the United States would be a better way at preventing these kinds of things as well as legislation requiring locked gun storage.
Idk if there is but there should be yearly mental health checkups when you own a gun. People can be completely normal and have something in their life happen that causes them to spiral down.
[QUOTE=Uberpro;38854098]No, no it's not.[/QUOTE] What is the difference, then? If I'm a responsible gun owner who collects guns for target shooting and historical value, why should I have them taken away? Because some autistic kid shot up a school? Because his mother didn't have a safe to keep him away from them? Do you really think the means to an end are more pertinent than the mindset that caused an intent for that end in the first place?
[QUOTE=Soldier32;38854116]Idk if there is but there should be yearly mental health checkups when you own a gun. People can be completely normal and have something in their life happen that causes them to spiral down.[/QUOTE] This has been suggested but gun owners complain that it would be expensive and inconvenient. Any legislation at this point needs to be to the absolutely convenience and benefit of gun owners, or nothing will happen.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.