Rant: politicizing gun violence

[Rukh Whitefang]

I am sick and tired of watching politicians using evil crimes to push their agendas. Sick and tired of it. Stop politicizing crimes to sell your supposed "plan". I have come to the conclusion that The President either is pushing a different agenda and using gun violence as his excuse (more likely) or (less likely) he is just a complete moron. Its cited by the FBI that 98.6% (2013 statistics) of all gun crimes are committed by an illegally purchased firearm. Instead of cracking down on the illegal weapons black market, they want to make it next it impossible to by a gun legally (or ban them completely). And quite frankly at this point I have to begin to wonder why. When the facts are so glaringly obvious that doing to doesn't stop violent gun crimes in the U.S (Chicago is a great example) I have to believe there is an ulterior motive.

[Conker]

No one wants to ban guns completely. Like, even liberals who smoke all the pot and drink all the Starbucks and hate all the trigger warnings like guns. It's the U.S. We love guns.

Also, it worked for Australia so /shrug

Edited November 29, 2015 by Conker

[Mikazuki Marazhu]

There are countries that bans firearms. it doesn't go so well...

[Phausk]

There are countries that bans firearms. it doesn't go so well...

The UK doesn't seem that bad?

I just find it funny how all of the crazy pro-gun advocates think the government is going to come knocking at their doors to take their guns away.

[Rukh Whitefang]

The U.S has a massive black market in firearms, that will not go away by trying to blanket ban all guns. I have yet to see any politician take on the illegal weapons trade here in this country. All I have seen is those in power continue to target the smallest area of gun crimes (5000 gun crimes a year are with legally purchased weapons) and think that doing so will fix the entire issue. Look I am not against background checks (most states already have them), but thats not the issue. Nor will gun restrictions and bans solve the issue. Right now, I could go and find an illegal gun and purchase it for dirt cheap on the street. Its that easy.

[PastryOfApathy]

I'm not going to get into a debate about gun control because it's going to end up a retarded mess no matter what.

All I'll say is anyone who thinks that having everyone walking around packing heat 24/7 will fix everyone's problems is stupid and should feel bad.

The UK doesn't seem that bad?

I just find it funny how all of the crazy pro-gun advocates think the government is going to come knocking at their doors to take their guns away.

People will believe anything if you scare them enough. All it takes is a massively publicized display of gun-violence and a couple out of context clips of the president talking about tighter gun laws to scare everyone into thinking the government gestapo are gonna steal all their guns. It's a lucrative business after all, just ask Alex Jones, Glen Beck or virtually any other far-right political pundit.

And before anyone says something like "but durr here in britabong land that's not what right means...", shut up you filthy commie.

[Vallium]

INB4 Gun debate:

Also, I would think the point of politicizing bad events to push an agenda is kind of the entire point in order to learn from a prevalent social issue and not have acts of violence happen again thereby making attempts to the betterment of the lives of citizens?

I mean nobody likes politics but doesnt it exist for a reason? Maybe if you mean sneaky politicians only out for themselves, their power, and their money....but things that are actually an issue getting talked about and seeking solutions???what? Oh no, no way.

Edited November 29, 2015 by WolfNightV4X1
wtf *their *there *theyre *killmeIcantgrammer

[Rukh Whitefang]

Both parties are pushing an agenda, lets be clear about that. Neither major party is offering any kind of solution to the rampant gun crime from illegal guns. I am just sick of seeing politics using tragedies to further their own personal agendas. And as far as gun crimes, the stats are glaringly obvious as to where the problem is coming from, yet its purposely being ignored by those in power and I have to wonder why.

[Azu]

There are countries that bans firearms. it doesn't go so well...

Countries with an outright, total firearm ban? I don't really know any.

Heavily controlling and limiting citizen firearm ownership? That has been shown to be quite successful in quite a few nations. Namely Japan, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, etc.

However, culture plays a large part in it. I believe that similar gun-control laws imposed in the US would be incredibly unsuccessful, given the massively ingrained cultural infatuation towards firearms and proximity to other nations with lax gun control laws.

[DJT]

Uh? The United States is the one with the permissive guns laws in North America 

Edited November 29, 2015 by DJT

[FlynnCoyote]

The US should have banned guns years ago. By this point, I don't think it will make a difference.

It worked here in Australia because our population is smaller and our culture is not so centered around the illusion of total freedom to own guns and shit. Really, it's your culture that's fucked up. Crying patriotism or freedom or whatever when you demand to be allowed to keep your guns is just retarded. Oh look, it's in the constitution right? Yea, which was written before the country had a damn properly organized military. Which was the point back then, you can have guns but you become part of a well organized militia when required. This is clearly no longer the case.

That particular freedom serves practically no constructive purpose anymore.

[#00Buck]

The UK doesn't seem that bad?

I just find it funny how all of the crazy pro-gun advocates think the government is going to come knocking at their doors to take their guns away.

The UK is the violent crime capital of europe. 

Lots of people get killed there. They rank in the top 3 for homicides. 

[I Did It For The Cat Girls]

The US should have banned guns years ago. By this point, I don't think it will make a difference.

It worked here in Australia because our population is smaller and our culture is not so centered around the illusion of total freedom to own guns and shit. Really, it's your culture that's fucked up. Crying patriotism or freedom or whatever when you demand to be allowed to keep your guns is just retarded. Oh look, it's in the constitution right? Yea, which was written before the country had a damn properly organized military. Which was the point back then, you can have guns but you become part of a well organized militia when required. This is clearly no longer the case.

That particular freedom serves practically no constructive purpose anymore.

[MUH AUSTRALIAN CULTURE IS SUPERIOR TO THE SUBHUMAN CULTURE YOU YANKEE SHITS POSSESS. DESU DESU DESU DESU DESU HUMAN ETHNOCENTRISM GOOOOOOOOOOOOO]

 

Edited November 29, 2015 by I Did It For The Cat Girls

[PastryOfApathy]

The US should have banned guns years ago. By this point, I don't think it will make a difference.

It worked here in Australia because our population is smaller and our culture is not so centered around the illusion of total freedom to own guns and shit. Really, it's your culture that's fucked up. Crying patriotism or freedom or whatever when you demand to be allowed to keep your guns is just retarded. Oh look, it's in the constitution right? Yea, which was written before the country had a damn properly organized military. Which was the point back then, you can have guns but you become part of a well organized militia when required. This is clearly no longer the case.

That particular freedom serves practically no constructive purpose anymore.

So how hard were you masturbating while you typed that? Be honest.

[Clove Darkwave]

Just as much as no one has any realistic plan for dealing with the illegal weapons market, no one has ever spoken a realistic plan for actually doing something with the sheer amount of privately owned firearms in the US along with any realistic means of collection. Furthermore since the items have monetary value, you can't just up and steal them from the citizens either so it becomes a complicated balancing of budget too.

Simple for smaller countries maybe, here's hoping it keeps working out for them.

[FlynnCoyote]

So how hard were you masturbating while you typed that? Be honest.

Not all that hard. Typing one handed is difficult enough. :v

Care to offer an alternative view, or is this just your kneejerk reaction?

[PastryOfApathy]

Not all that hard. Typing one handed is difficult enough. :v

Care to offer an alternative view, or is this just your kneejerk reaction?

As I already said, I'm not getting in some kind of retarded debate about gun control since it's kind of one of those "the only winning move is not to play" situations.

That being said, any random asshole who lives on the opposite end of the planet can make sweeping generalizations and criticisms about cultures they know little to nothing about. Contrary to what you may believe, the culture surrounding guns in this country is amazingly complex and can't just be boiled down to "hurr durr muh freedoms xdd" and by doing that you make yourself look fucking stupid.

Actually I lied, I'll provide an "alternate view" for one thing. The second amendment serving "practically no constructive purpose" is factually incorrect. Hunters, aka people who kinda need guns to do their job are instrumental in keeping certain animal populations in check. Wild boar in particular are nasty motherfuckers in places like California, seeing as they have zero natural predators and can very easily fuck up crops, and kill people.

[FlynnCoyote]

As I already said, I'm not getting in some kind of retarded debate about gun control since it's kind of one of those "the only winning move is not to play" situations.

That being said, any random asshole who lives on the opposite end of the planet can make sweeping generalizations and criticisms about cultures they know little to nothing about. Contrary to what you may believe, the culture surrounding guns in this country is amazingly complex and can't just be boiled down to "hurr durr muh freedoms xdd" and by doing that you make yourself look fucking stupid.

Actually I lied, I'll provide an "alternate view" for one thing. The second amendment serving "practically no constructive purpose" is factually incorrect. Hunters, aka people who kinda need guns to do their job are instrumental in keeping certain animal populations in check. Wild boar in particular are nasty motherfuckers in places like California, seeing as they have zero natural predators and can very easily fuck up crops, and kill people.

 

 

So your one productive purpose happens to be one of the few legal reasons to own a gun in Australia too? Amazing that. Was your next argument that police and military need guns as well?

I'd never dispute that point and I didn't indent to claim that guns have no purpose whatsoever in a regulated and controlled situation.

What I said is that a culture that demands to be able to own guns just because, is fucked up.  

Edited November 29, 2015 by FlynnCoyote

[MalletFace]

Oh look, it's in the constitution right? Yea, which was written before the country had a damn properly organized military. Which was the point back then, you can have guns but you become part of a well organized militia when required.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I find it interesting that many fail to notice the "a well regulated Militia" part, and most judges post-1980 consider only those four words to be archaic.

I also find it interesting that many defend this amendment more than the IX or the XIV. Seems less of a "certain unalienable Rights" kind of thing than an "I just want guns" kind of thing, especially when you consider that certain crimes, despite having served your sentence, cause a person to lose this right.

Its cited by the FBI that 98.6% (2013 statistics) of all gun crimes are committed by an illegally purchased firearm. Instead of cracking down on the illegal weapons black market, they want to make it next it impossible to by a gun legally (or ban them completely). And quite frankly at this point I have to begin to wonder why. When the facts are so glaringly obvious that doing to doesn't stop violent gun crimes in the U.S (Chicago is a great example) I have to believe there is an ulterior motive.

I am not going to go in on morality, so I am ignoring the first part of your post. I am just going to talk about the latter part.

That 98.6% of gun crimes in 2013 were committed with an illegally purchased firearm is a little odd when the Bureau of Justice Statistics (Table 14) found that, of guns used to commit crimes surveyed in '97 and '04

• around 8% were purchased on the black market,
• around 20% were purchased on the street,
• around 9% were stolen,
• around 40% were purchased, borrowed, or traded from family or friends,
• around 14% were purchased or traded from various kinds of retail and pawn, and
• around 9% came from other sources.

It stands in contrast with the information so long as we only count theft, street purchase, and black market purchase as illegal, though. What that says is that it may be likely that stores, family, and friends contribute largely to the illegal purchase number. They are, in large part, ignoring the laws that do exist.

Which leads me to the Chicago example. The city itself, in recent time, doesn't really have strict gun laws, and they only apply to federally registered retail stores and pawn shops; one must have an Illinois FOID card and registration is not required, and they no longer have a ban on concealed carry. When the regulation was there and when it wasn't, crimes involving firearms steadily increased. As it turns out, though, most of the firearms used in crimes in Chicago come from stores outside of the city, from unregulated gun shows, and from family and friends that are, in large part, ignoring the laws that do exist.

And as far as gun crimes, the stats are glaringly obvious as to where the problem is coming from, yet its purposely being ignored by those in power and I have to wonder why.

I agree when you say, "The stats are glaringly obvious as to where the problem is coming from," but I would have to assume you are talking about your all-powerful black market and the alarming number of crimes committed with guns bought shadily on the street.

The problem exists with those that are ignoring regulation or leaving firearms available for those who wish to use them in unsafe ways. I see no major problem with a black market when most illegally purchased firearms come from small retailers, grandma's gun cabinet, and your buddy Tim.

Just to emphasize this, I will point out that most deaths and injuries caused by firearms are through self-harm and suicide. In fact, suicides using legally-owned firearms are twice as common as homicides according to the CDC and FBI.

Most people supporting gun control don't want to take grandma's guns. Most people supporting gun control don't want to keep Tim from buying guns. Most people supporting gun control don't want to keep small gun stores from selling guns.

Guns are such an important part of modern U.S. culture that it is entirely ridiculous to want to take, ban, or criminalize guns. Most people supporting gun control want to make sure existing legislation is followed and that stricter control is placed on weapons that aren't reasonably able to be used for self defense and are more likely to cause harm than good.

For example, even though it is legal, why would one reasonably need to own a functional, early '70s minigun in rural Colorado? Are the Viet Cong attacking your house on a weekly basis, or do you just think it is really cool?

(If you can't tell, I'm in an argumentative mood.)

Edited November 29, 2015 by MalletFace
My wording was ambiguous.

[PastryOfApathy]

So your one productive purpose happens to be one of the few legal reasons to own a gun in Australia too? Amazing that. Was your next argument that police and military need guns as well?

You simply said it served "no practical purpose", I gave you one.

What I said is that a culture that demands to be able to own guns just because, is fucked up.  

This is where we start veering into "retarded gun control debate" territory.

I any case believe what you want, it makes no difference to me either way. I mean, if believing that us Americans are a bunch of uncivilized savages unlike the glorious aussie master race just because I could theoretically obtain a handgun for recreation or self-protection (even if realistically it's more of a security blanket, but that's a whole other issue) makes you happy then go for it. It's 3 at night, I've had a shit day and I'm tired as all hell. I ain't spending all night arguing gun control online with some random asshole on a furry forum.

[Spot]

Wow the U.S government is biased and hippocritical as fuck. If they really want to badger on about civilian gun violence, maybe they should take into account the amount of trigger-happy cops in law enforcement and the amount of deaths they're accountable for annually.

   

 

Edited November 29, 2015 by Mr. Fox

[FlynnCoyote]

 I any case believe what you want, it makes no difference to me either way. I mean, if believing that us Americans are a bunch of uncivilized savages unlike the glorious aussie master race just because I could theoretically obtain a handgun for recreation or self-protection (even if realistically it's more of a security blanket, but that's a whole other issue) makes you happy then go for it. It's 3 at night, I've had a shit day and I'm tired as all hell. I ain't spending all night arguing gun control online with some random asshole on a furry forum.

I will believe what I want, until such time as I am presented with a more rational argument. Something you have twice elected not to present.

Thus far all you have said is that I'm wrong or stupid. And I didn't claim all americans were savages nor that we aussies are some master race. All I said, again since you're not listening, is that a culture that demands to own guns just because it can is fucked up. I'm talking about gun culture, not all of America. There is no reason Johnny 9-5 needs to be packing heat all day, no reason that guns need to be readily available on the third aisle of every K-Mart.

I'm sorry, but if you genuinely feel that guns are a universal necessity in a developed country, then Sir that country is fucked up.

[Kinharia]

The UK doesn't seem that bad?

I just find it funny how all of the crazy pro-gun advocates think the government is going to come knocking at their doors to take their guns away.

North of Ireland is in the UK and we have a shit ton of paramilitaries armed with guns

[Kaizy]

Christ almighty I hate gun debates, they lead to absolutely nothing. Just a 40-page back-and-forth where no one's opinions are getting changed because humans are naturally stubborn as fuck.

Why can't you people talk about something that's actually important, like how hard it is to find a creative OC in this fandom, or where the best paw socks are being sold currently.

[Dr. Doggo]

the only gun control i need is my index finger

mind yer feet m8

[Hakar-Kerarmor]

At least gun debates aren't as bad as male circumcision debates.

[GarthTheWereWolf]

Mmmmm, gun control debates..

[#00Buck]

How many of you shoot in the shower? 

[Rukh Whitefang]

The US should have banned guns years ago. By this point, I don't think it will make a difference.

It worked here in Australia because our population is smaller and our culture is not so centered around the illusion of total freedom to own guns and shit. Really, it's your culture that's fucked up. Crying patriotism or freedom or whatever when you demand to be allowed to keep your guns is just retarded. Oh look, it's in the constitution right? Yea, which was written before the country had a damn properly organized military. Which was the point back then, you can have guns but you become part of a well organized militia when required. This is clearly no longer the case.

That particular freedom serves practically no constructive purpose anymore.

I'm sorry, but if you genuinely feel that guns are a universal necessity in a developed country, then Sir that country is fucked up.

First banning all firearms is itself illegal. Its a constitutional right to own a firearm. Your suggesting rewriting the Constitution to change what it says and was meant for (not going to happen and is a stupid argument to try and make). And as far as basing your argument on living in a island country... Your on an island. A lot easier to control what comes in than compared to the U.S which has a very porous border in the south. We can't stop illegals from crossing the border, drugs from crossing the border, and weapons from crossing the border. Drugs are outright banned and thats solved the drug problem... Oh wait, it didn't.

As far a militias go, they still exist. Michigan has the largest non regulated militia in the country.

Oh and as far as how well it works in your country I distinctly remember the hostage situation in Sydney. Wasn't it a crazed individual who held a bunch of people hostage for hours on end with a single shotgun?A single shot gun wielding maniac brought the entire area to a standstill.

The freedom to legally own a firearm definitely serves a purpose. Its called personal defense. Its why I carry (to protect myself and my home). And just the other day the DC police chief who is for more restrictions on firearm ownership just did an interview with 60 minutes on how the public should respond to a major event. "Your options are run, hide, or fight,” the D.C. police chief said. “If you’re in a position to try and take the gunman down, to take the gunman out, it’s the best option for saving lives before police can get there.”

Any country where only the cops and military can carry guns is a society where you have to completely trust those in power to protect you. And quite frankly in my opinion any country that gives weapons to its police and military but not to citizens is grounds for becoming on some level a police state. You have no way to protect yourself from governmental abuse.

Just as much as no one has any realistic plan for dealing with the illegal weapons market, no one has ever spoken a realistic plan for actually doing something with the sheer amount of privately owned firearms in the US along with any realistic means of collection. Furthermore since the items have monetary value, you can't just up and steal them from the citizens either so it becomes a complicated balancing of budget too.

Simple for smaller countries maybe, here's hoping it keeps working out for them.

Uhm no. Trying to "collect" legally purchased firearms? That would cause a mass riot of epic proportions. Second I highly doubt that people would be properly reimbursed for the amount of money spent on ammunition and firearms. And third as a gun owner myself like hell I would just turn over my legal firearms because the government says so.

 

I am not going to go in on morality, so I am ignoring the first part of your post. I am just going to talk about the latter part.

That 98.6% of gun crimes in 2013 were committed with an illegally purchased firearm is a little odd when the Bureau of Justice Statistics (Table 14) found that, of guns used to commit crimes surveyed in '97 and '04

• around 8% were purchased on the black market,
• around 20% were purchased on the street,
• around 9% were stolen,
• around 40% were purchased, borrowed, or traded from family or friends,
• around 14% were purchased or traded from various kinds of retail and pawn, and
• around 9% came from other sources

 The 2013 National Crime Victimize Survey report there were almost exactly 300,000 crimes, including murders, facilitated with a firearm. Of those, not more than 5,000 can be shown to have been facilitated with a firearm legally purchased by the offender.

The AFT (sourced through PBS frontline "hot guns") states the biggest way this happens are with straw man gun purchases (which are illegal). The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Another large source of guns used in crimes are unlicensed street dealers who either get their guns through illegal transactions with licensed dealers, straw purchases, or from gun thefts. These illegal dealers turn around and sell these illegally on the street. An additional way criminals gain access to guns is family and friends, either through sales, theft or as gift.

The black market for guns in the U.S is a huge business. People who can't pass a background check are not going to try and purchase a gun legally because they know they won't get one. So they find a gun through illegal means.

[MalletFace]

The 2013 National Crime Victimize Survey report there were almost exactly 300,000 crimes, including murders, facilitated with a firearm. Of those, not more than 5,000 can be shown to have been facilitated with a firearm legally purchased by the offender.

The AFT (sourced through PBS frontline "hot guns") states the biggest way this happens are with straw man gun purchases (which are illegal). The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Another large source of guns used in crimes are unlicensed street dealers who either get their guns through illegal transactions with licensed dealers, straw purchases, or from gun thefts. These illegal dealers turn around and sell these illegally on the street. An additional way criminals gain access to guns is family and friends, either through sales, theft or as gift.

The black market for guns in the U.S is a huge business. People who can't pass a background check are not going to try and purchase a gun legally because they know they won't get one. So they find a gun through illegal means.

That link is just victimization statistics, so I find no tell of any number relating to firearms purchased legally or illegally. To say there is is dishonest.

With the PBS thing, though, the ATF itself gives no information on anything but purchase location and PBS cites ATF, so I looked for something that could stand on its own by the ATF or PBS; I found nothing.

Again, part of the problem is through legal dealers and regular people that are, for the most part, ignoring the law which does exist. They can sell legally, but they forget to ask for an ID, don't re-register the weapon, or don't make a receipt of purchase so the purchase instantly becomes gets identified as illegal.

[Rukh Whitefang]

That link is just victimization statistics, so I find no tell of any number relating to firearms purchased legally or illegally. To say there is is dishonest.

With the PBS thing, though, the ATF itself gives no information on anything but purchase location and PBS cites ATF, so I looked for something that could stand on its own by the ATF or PBS; I found nothing.

Again, part of the problem is through legal dealers and regular people that are, for the most part, ignoring the law which does exist. They can sell legally, but they forget to ask for an ID, don't re-register the weapon, or don't make a receipt of purchase so the purchase instantly becomes gets identified as illegal.

Sorry forgot to paste the other articles and references. The NIJ (National Institute of Justice) conducted prison surveys (national archive of criminal justice data) about gun violence where most criminals surveyed said they bought their firearm illegally. Numbers are around 80% of those surveyed purchased their guns on the street or from a "friend" (survey doesn't define what friend means, could be gang members and so on). Only 3-11% (depends on what survey, when it was taken) purchased their gun through legal means (as in followed the law completely). This again to me says those who want to commit a crime know that its easier (and far cheaper) to purchase a gun under the table so to speak.

Solving gun violence isn't a black and white issue by any means. And I am sick of both major parties touting they alone with a simple flick of the wrist can solve this national problem. Its simply not that easy. More laws won't fix the issue, banning guns won't fix the issue (again the amount of weapons on the street). There is a deep culture issue in major cities and isn't being addressed. We can sit here and break down violent crimes by race too and see a huge disparity among ethnicities in the U.S, which again no political party is addressing.

Wow the U.S government is biased and hippocritical as fuck. If they really want to badger on about civilian gun violence, maybe they should take into account the amount of trigger-happy cops in law enforcement and the amount of deaths they're accountable for annually.

   

 

Can't believe I missed this gem of a comment. Fox are you one of those people that believe the majority of cops are evil racist people? Are you actually buying what the mass media throws on TV? Have you even looked at the statistics of gun crimes in major cities and seen who is actually killing whom?

Edited November 29, 2015 by Rukh Whitefang

[Spot]

Can't believe I missed this gem of a comment. Fox are you one of those people that believe the majority of cops are evil racist people? 

Don't worry it seems I'm overlook a lot lately.

No, I'm of the belief that being trained with a military mind to handle civilian situations does more harm than good. Even vets are outraged by the actions of law enforcement.

 

 

 

[Taikugemu]

Well, banning guns didn't help Brazil at all.

But i don't think having them around would solve our violence problems either, because there are a lot of factors behind it, it's not simply having or not guns at the population's disposal.

[FlynnCoyote]

First banning all firearms is itself illegal. Its a constitutional right to own a firearm. Your suggesting rewriting the Constitution to change what it says and was meant for (not going to happen and is a stupid argument to try and make).

 

Oh and as far as how well it works in your country I distinctly remember the hostage situation in Sydney. Wasn't it a crazed individual who held a bunch of people hostage for hours on end with a single shotgun?A single shot gun wielding maniac brought the entire area to a standstill.

First point, why is that a stupid argument? Who says your constitution is ironclad? Isn't that what amendments are for in the first place?

Second, yes. One large scale hostage situation, with minimal casualties (two I believe) in the last two fucking decades or so since gun control was introduced. I'd look up your country's stats, but I've had a good day and don't really want to spoil that with nihilistic depression at this point.

Believe what you will, and I'll do the same.

[Zeke]

friends, either through sales, theft or as gift.

The black market for guns in the U.S is a huge business. People who can't pass a background check are not going to try and purchase a gun legally because they know they won't get one. So they find a gun through illegal means.

Or go to a Gun show.  The vendors do not do background checks on people who purchase them plus ammunition. Guess what? That's a legal means to do it without the red tape. 

However, a lot of your "illegal guns are through swap meets where you can either trade them with friends, family, or some random guy on Craigslist who wants to trade his handgun for one like your's.

 

The government will not ban guns as much as the NRA fear mongers that "the gov'ment gonna take dem" or diehard leftist Dems scream "ban guns" until they bleed from their eyes and ears. I wouldn't say it's a constitutional right because even some people are limited with carrying a weapon due to bias, but it is so ingrained in our culture that it's like removing an organ from your body if someone dare to try it. The only thing that politicians can do is just pander and push their agenda,

Edited November 30, 2015 by Zeke

[Clove Darkwave]

Uhm no. Trying to "collect" legally purchased firearms? That would cause a mass riot of epic proportions. Second I highly doubt that people would be properly reimbursed for the amount of money spent on ammunition and firearms. And third as a gun owner myself like hell I would just turn over my legal firearms because the government says so.

That's literally what I just said, sans being a gun owner. Your mouth froth is showing.

[Kaizy]

[#00Buck]

Sign above him says "fitting room."

He's wider than the door. 

[Astrium]

A little off-topic, but fun to consider: in the U.S., you can legally make your own gun so long as it has an unrifled barrel. Of course, a gun with an unrifled barrel is only accurate for a few dozen feet at most, but that's really all you would need if you were planning on killing someone with it. Anyone want to offer any opinions on that?

[Dr. Doggo]

A little off-topic, but fun to consider: in the U.S., you can legally make your own gun so long as it has an unrifled barrel. Of course, a gun with an unrifled barrel is only accurate for a few dozen feet at most, but that's really all you would need if you were planning on killing someone with it. Anyone want to offer any opinions on that?

There's something called a pipe gun that is literally just a piece of pipe and something else, and you can load a shotgun cartridge into that for blastytimes. No complicated stuff like a trigger mechanism or anything. I had the blueprint for it at one time. Oh, and the Sten submachinegun.

[Zeke]

A little off-topic, but fun to consider: in the U.S., you can legally make your own gun so long as it has an unrifled barrel. Of course, a gun with an unrifled barrel is only accurate for a few dozen feet at most, but that's really all you would need if you were planning on killing someone with it. Anyone want to offer any opinions on that?

All you need is a suitable 3d printer and proper mats.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJyf1IrHtcE

 

[Phausk]

You could probably kill someone with a potato gun. I dunno if those are illegal or not, but older people used to build them here for fun back in the 90s.

Or go to a Gun show.  The vendors do not do background checks on people who purchase them plus ammunition. Guess what? That's a legal means to do it without the red tape.

Isn't that how the Columbine shooters got some of their guns?

[Zeke]

You could probably kill someone with a potato gun. I dunno if those are illegal or not, but older people used to build them here for fun back in the 90s.

Isn't that how the Columbine shooters got some of their guns?

According to what most places say, that it was a straw purchase since she's 18 years old and the two boys were underage at the time and couldn't buy it. I wouldn't doubt it though since they just write down your name, check your ID and don't ask questions on what you're going to do with it.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Zeke

[Rassah]

Please don't use Australia as an example of where a gun ban worked. Gun violence was on decline already, actually spiked upwards right after the gun ban, and then continued its decline. Statistically, there is absolutely no effect of the gun ban on Australia's homicide level. What's more, neighboring New Zealand did not ban guns, and yet also had the exact same continuing decline in homicides as Australia. So it's not the guns.

Also, don't call it gun bans. Unless you are planning to ban police and military from carrying guns too, all you are advocating is gun centralization in the hands of the few with power. So own up to it and claim you want to centralize gun ownership, not ban it.

[Astrium]

Please don't use Australia as an example of where a gun ban worked. Gun violence was on decline already, actually spiked upwards right after the gun ban, and then continued its decline. Statistically, there is absolutely no effect of the gun ban on Australia's homicide level. What's more, neighboring New Zealand did not ban guns, and yet also had the exact same continuing decline in homicides as Australia. So it's not the guns.

Also, don't call it gun bans. Unless you are planning to ban police and military from carrying guns too, all you are advocating is gun centralization in the hands of the few with power. So own up to it and claim you want to centralize gun ownership, not ban it.

Is it weird that I missed Rassah's libertarian dogma?

[Ginpanther]

You could probably kill someone with a potato gun. I dunno if those are illegal or not, but older people used to build them here for fun back in the 90s.

My father made his and powered it with starting fluid. He also rifled the barrel, because he's insane like that.

Man, I miss that spud gun.

[Kaizy]

[Rassah]

 

Is it weird that I missed Rassah's libertarian dogma?

Are facts and statistics "dogma" now? Did you bother looking up anything about Australian homicide statistics?

[AshleyAshes]

Please don't use Australia as an example of where a gun ban worked. Gun violence was on decline already, actually spiked upwards right after the gun ban, and then continued its decline. Statistically, there is absolutely no effect of the gun ban on Australia's homicide level. What's more, neighboring New Zealand did not ban guns, and yet also had the exact same continuing decline in homicides as Australia. So it's not the guns.

Also, don't call it gun bans. Unless you are planning to ban police and military from carrying guns too, all you are advocating is gun centralization in the hands of the few with power. So own up to it and claim you want to centralize gun ownership, not ban it.

Rassah almost makes a good point here except he misses the point.  Australia did not simply implement gun restrictions and see a fall in gun violence.  Australia as a society saw less and less need for gun violence, this enabled popular support for fire arms restrictions laws to pass while the society continued to engage in less gun violence.  Australia didn't ban guns; Australia stopped shooting people in the face.  The United States of America however, is very pro-shooting people in the face.  The United States has a problem with mothers carrying loaded, unsafetied handguns in their purses and being killed by their toddlers.  ( http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/30/woman-shot-with-own-gun/21062089/ )  The United States has a problem with firearms carried for 'protection' being used to fire upon cars that cut the driver off. ( http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/10/22/man-charged-with-murder-in-albuquerque-road-rage-killing-of-4-year-old.html )  The United States has a problem with children dying because keeping a loaded firearm on the coffee table next to the Wiimote sounds like a good idea. ( http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/toddler-dies-mistaking-gun-wii-controller/story?id=10056190 )  The United States has a problem with weird, murder obsessed teenagers who are home schooled to 'protect them from the public school system' having access to a wide range of hunting rifles.  ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting )  In short, The United States has a systemic gun culture problem that it is unwilling to address.  Who's going to support a ban on firearms in a nation that feels that it needs to have a gun incase that bitch refuses to go stop trying to divorce her husband...?  Er, I mean, a nation that feels it needs to take protection into it's own hands.

 

However, as for any counter argument against gun control that is based around only the Government having firearms and using it to oppress the people.  Good news, The United States of America has already banned ownership of the following things that would be most useful towards maintaining 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state'; GPS guided bombs, high speed interceptor aircraft, artillery, combat capable tanks, shoulder mounted surface to air missile launchers, cruise missiles, attack helicopters, grenade launchers, land mines, inter-continental ballistic missiles, the GAU-8 Avenger 30mm cannon, nuclear powered 'super' aircraft carriers, and many other such things.

Secondly, and most importantly, all branches of The United States Military's ranks are filled primarily of lower and middle class citizens, all of whom have volunteered for the job.  When faced with the orders to 'Round up everyone in New Jersey, arrest them, kill anyone who resists, because fuck New Jersey!' those soldiers will promptly decide 'Actually, fuck you'.  You then have the larger problem of these soldiers, the ones who actually know how to drive the tanks and use them with the best training available in the world, have turned on the government in the face of egregious and blatantly illegal orders.  Shockingly, soldiers are not actually 'KillBots' who can then be ordered to kill anyone on command.  Rather, they are human beings, some of whom come from New Jersey, have friends and family there, or just had a nice time at Atlantic City once and feel that 'Operation Fuck Jersey' is a crock of shit.

[Astrium]

Rassah almost makes a good point here except he misses the point.  Australia did not simply implement gun restrictions and see a fall in gun violence.  Australia as a society saw less and less need for gun violence, this enabled popular support for fire arms restrictions laws to pass while the society continued to engage in less gun violence.  Australia didn't ban guns; Australia stopped shooting people in the face.  The United States of America however, is very pro-shooting people in the face.  The United States has a problem with mothers carrying loaded, unsafetied handguns in their purses and being killed by their toddlers.  ( http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/30/woman-shot-with-own-gun/21062089/ )  The United States has a problem with firearms carried for 'protection' being used to fire upon cars that cut the driver off. ( http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/10/22/man-charged-with-murder-in-albuquerque-road-rage-killing-of-4-year-old.html )  The United States has a problem with children dying because keeping a loaded firearm on the coffee table next to the Wiimote sounds like a good idea. ( http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/toddler-dies-mistaking-gun-wii-controller/story?id=10056190 )  The United States has a problem with weird, murder obsessed teenagers who are home schooled to 'protect them from the public school system' having access to a wide range of hunting rifles.  ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting )  In short, The United States has a systemic gun culture problem that it is unwilling to address.  Who's going to support a ban on firearms in a nation that feels that it needs to have a gun incase that bitch refuses to go stop trying to divorce her husband...?  Er, I mean, a nation that feels it needs to take protection into it's own hands.

 

However, as for any counter argument against gun control that is based around only the Government having firearms and using it to oppress the people.  Good news, The United States of America has already banned ownership of the following things that would be most useful towards maintaining 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state'; GPS guided bombs, high speed interceptor aircraft, artillery, combat capable tanks, shoulder mounted surface to air missile launchers, cruise missiles, attack helicopters, grenade launchers, land mines, inter-continental ballistic missiles, the GAU-8 Avenger 30mm cannon, nuclear powered 'super' aircraft carriers, and many other such things.

Secondly, and most importantly, all branches of The United States Military's ranks are filled primarily of lower and middle class citizens, all of whom have volunteered for the job.  When faced with the orders to 'Round up everyone in New Jersey, arrest them, kill anyone who resists, because fuck New Jersey!' those soldiers will promptly decide 'Actually, fuck you'.  You then have the larger problem of these soldiers, the ones who actually know how to drive the tanks and use them with the best training available in the world, have turned on the government in the face of egregious and blatantly illegal orders.  Shockingly, soldiers are not actually 'KillBots' who can then be ordered to kill anyone on command.  Rather, they are human beings, some of whom come from New Jersey, have friends and family there, or just had a nice time at Atlantic City once and feel that 'Operation Fuck Jersey' is a crock of shit.

I say we put Operation Fuck Jersey into action immediately, because fuck Jersey. Then we can move on to Ohio.