My Problem with Gun control in America

Why is it always about banning guns

It’s not it’s just about stronger regulation that is not the same thing

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Why is it always about banning guns

It’s not it’s just about stronger regulation that is not the same thing

I wonder the same thing. Banning guns isn't the answer, but a lot of people I've talked to think it is.

I'm all for sensible regulation and education. I don't believe I should be able to own a rocket launcher or anything like that, but I also believe banning certain guns like the AR platform won't make the slightest difference, other than raising the price.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Why is it always about banning guns

Because the usual suspects want a people that are at the mercy of the state, and can't fight back.

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: RomeByFire
Treat guns like weed.

It's really that simple.

On second thought, guns probably shouldn't be as easy to get as weed is.

Conservative republicans preach about "personal freedoms, individuals responsibility," whilst also preaching about executing drug dealers and how cannabis should be outlawed because it's potential of misuse.

Like I said - treat guns the same way conservatives treat weed, "good people don't own firearms," am I right, or am I right?

Which ones? Most folks I know are conservative republicans and they are not against cannabis. But we do think personal responsibility is important. If you don't, that's a bit of an issue you should be dealing with I'd say.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Why is it always about banning guns

It’s not it’s just about stronger regulation that is not the same thing

What regulations would you like? can you offer some that the criminals will follow? I ask, because the law abiding folks who own guns will follow the law. They might bitch and complain, but they will follow the law, just as they have been. The very few who don't follow the law, seem to be the ones doing all the killing. Why aren't you rallying for tighter knife restrictions? you blokes have a tiny bit of a knife problem, and if it could save just one life, wouldn't it be worth it?

a reply to: okrian

Well this seems like a real smart argument.

I was waiting as to why you offered a sarcastic comment but it just sits there. Your idea is stupid. Period. Why it's stupid is so obvious I don't even need to back it up.

So, we need to be able to take up arms against the cops... that always works out well.

I'm not sure the OP is implying we need to take up arms against the Police.

The whole "tyrannical government" argument is so outdated, no longer applicable...

No longer applicable. Does this mean there are no more tyrannical governments and never will be? Does it mean we in the US are so far past any point return we cannot stop our own tyrannical government? Or does it mean the idea of a tyrannical government in the US in the 21st century is far fetched as to be ludicrous?

...never mind that the government wouldn't even need to fire one shot to dismantle the populous if they wanted to..

I have to assume you have given up hope on the American public to stand up for themselves?

...and has been terribly reinterpreted by activist judges.

I cannot determine to what you are referring. What has been terribly reinterpreted? The only subject in that sentence is "tyrannical government". I do not understand how activist judges can terribly reinterpret a tyranny.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I trust you and many others may honestly think that. I have no problem with you or your views.

Call me conspiratorial, but I would chalk up the latest push for "common sense" in the media to intellectual rent-seeking. History is rife with it. Even more so when the public at the time assumes they are beyond it's possibility.

Think Patriot Act and 4th Amendment. Heck, most Americans are so oblivious, they don't even know what happened.

a reply to: underwerks

By banning guns you'd be creating an entirely new criminal class. A class of people who are nothing but food to the prison industrial complex. Think the war on drugs part 2, with everything that comes along with it.

You bring up a great point. These second and third orders affects are never part of the national discussion. I am guessing that is probably be design.

a reply to: Bhadhidar

Let's examine that line of reasoning.

Right now, it is a right to keep and bear, and unalienable right, meaning the government cannot remove that right, only oppress it.

It's intrinsic the same way basic personal liberty is.

So I guess we could say that a law could be passed outlawing the basic intrinsic liberty of an entire segment of the population ... take your pick and define it however you like along any grounds: race, religion, class, etc. Those people could be given a grace period to turn themselves in to the authorities for their new legal bondage and servitude, and if they didn't comply, well it wasn't the law that made them fugitive slaves ... they did it to themselves.

I'm sure you would have all kinds of problems with that.

originally posted by: underwerks
It's idiocy to give up your guns when the people who continue to kill us will still be armed.

How many people do you personally know who have been the victim of an unjustified police shooting?
I'll wait...

Me thinks many of you greatly exaggerate this subject. Mainly because the numbers simply don't add up. Most police shootings that make national news end up justified. Yet leftists will continue to push their narrative even after the court proceedings.

a reply to: kaylaluv
Neither my guns or weed has ever killed a soul.

originally posted by: Oaktree
a reply to: kaylaluv
Neither my guns or weed has ever killed a soul.

Careful buddy, they will take your guns because of your weed too.

I like how they take the most common problem of domestic fighting, call it violence, then remove someone's guns.
Yelling at your spouse is enough.

They are too dangerous for guns, but can have knives, hammers, chainsaws, etc....

Tells you right there what that move was all about.

Circumvent the constitution some more.

Use women and children to do it.

Christ, the politicians are probably power hungry wife beaters.

Sh!ts getting out of control.

Give me the free gd country I was lead to belive we had.

The more you learn about how this rigged political bs works, the more you don't want to know.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: underwerks

For what it’s worth, I’m not on the “ban guns” bandwagon. I see other countries that allow guns that don’t have the rate of gun violence we have. We’re obviously doing something wrong, though.

The reasons that would be provided would be poilitically incorrect on both sides. Some individualls are more genetically impulsive than others (warrior genes). Free health care. Education system that works.

We need to ban all guns because then no one will be able to get them and use them. You know, kinda like when we banned alcohol. (sarc)

We don't have a gun problem we have a culture problem. The harder the left tries to ban guns the more they are going to create more problems.

a reply to: underwerks

Some interesting thoughts are espoused so far in this thread.

You could discuss domestic gun violence as much as you want, the other side is the gun violence abroad.

It does not necessarily go together. It seems to me a bit disingenuous. On the one hand harping on domestic gun availability, while exporting as much as possible abroad.

It clearly grows out of a biased point of view, the warped idea that the state is the monopolist on the exertion of force in any capacity available.

The representative democracies have already seen the erosion of individual, local and provincial and even domestic sovereignty. In the same vein, we also can see this.

If you are dependent on a representative clothed in a monopoly of force, what happens in any monopoly, will happen here too.

There will always be those who will have the means to evade the monopoly and the monopoly will simply lower it standards while raising the price.

Happy camping.

a reply to: kaylaluv

You are dead right, but its not the law pertaining to firearms availability, the ease of acquisition, the right to open carry (which should be in all states, but is only in some), that are the problem.

The problem is that your government are under no legal obligation to deal adequately with the health needs of your countrymen. Such is given over to private companies to deal with, on whatever basis they fancy to, and if they decide that being unable to pay for it means you get a lesser service or none, then so be it. I am sure there are more nuances than that, but that is the potted version.

The issue as it pertains to guns particularly, is that the answer to mass shootings has nothing to do with the tools, but everything to do with identifying perpetrators before they act, and treating them in a controlled environment, until they pose no further threat to society. None of these people have been sane. Whether its the Aurora Texas shooter, or the nutbar from the Pulse tragedy, or the freak from the Las Vegas or Parkland massacres, these individuals, in order to do what they did, were without doubt in an unsound frame of mind, a frame of mind which in most if not all cases, would have been identifiable by a professional in the psychiatric field.

But the provision of mental healthcare services in the US is as much of a joke as the fact you folks even need private insurance in the first place, and as long as this remains the case, the streets will run with blood regardless of the weapons used to make it happen.

They'll never disarm America. Guns aren't going anywhere. But I do think assault weapons need to be banned. During the prior ban in the 90's we weren't seeing carnage on this large of a scale. Don't know if it would make a difference or not. I guess that would be up for debate. It's obvious the AR is the gun of choice among mass shooters. We have a serious problem in the country and I don't care about peoples rights to own an AR. I'm a sportsman and I hunt.

I'm 2 blocks north of Detroit. I smoke outside and I hear gunshots all night long every single night. Stricter rules for gun purchases need to be in place. We need IQ tests and psychological evaluations for gun purchases. Half of the inner city in Detroit can't read at a 3rd grade level but they have no problems buying a firearm.

originally posted by: Mandroid7

originally posted by: Oaktree
a reply to: kaylaluv
Neither my guns or weed has ever killed a soul.

Careful buddy, they will take your guns because of your weed too.

Didn’t say my weed, I gave that up a long time ago. I’m