Support NeoGAF

[BANGS]

Simple solution: Make guns illegals in all the high crime areas like Chicago and Detroit, that should stop all the shootings...

 

[Nintendo Switch]

What's most damming is that Alaska never gets talked about. It's only ever Chicago.

Probably because Alaska is a bright red rural state.

It doesn’t fit the agenda of the NRA or Fox News to talk about the 25 bright red states that have much higher rates of crime and violence than both Illinois and Michigan...

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/crime-and-corrections/public-safety

Michigan and Illinois are 24 and 25 on the list. There are 25 mostly bright red states ranked lower on this list due to having significantly higher rates of crime.

The most populated states with the most and biggest cities, and the strictest gun regulations, all rank high in terms of public safety and rank very low in terms of violent crime.

 

[BANGS]

Background checks, end of loop holes, keep crazies from getting them, etc. I really question the sanity and/or motivation of those who don't want these things.

Because they aren't effective and can be abused... If you want to see how great America is regulating dangerous machines, just look at our awful motor vehicle situation...

 

[gioGAF]

I'm not even sure why this is a controversy...they are only asking for sane things. Background checks, end of loop holes, keep crazies from getting them, etc. I really question the sanity and/or motivation of those who don't want these things. Whatever....

Agreed, there is no controversy with the desired outcome. I think the main problem lies with disingenuous solutions (ban assault weapons is stupid), better to focus on things like what you mentioned.

 

[Nintendo Switch]

Because they aren't effective and can be abused... If you want to see how great America is regulating dangerous machines, just look at our awful motor vehicle situation...

This is false, motor vehicles are far far safer today than they have ever been thanks to regulations. Per capita, far fewer drivers, passengers and pedestrians hit by a car die today than they have before we started regulations to improve car safety. DUIs have also plummeted per capita in the decades since we first imposed laws and regulations to decrease drunk driving.

Likewise, we also have a ton of evidence that gun regulations have a big impact in reducing violent crime.

We have had an absolute explosion in mass shootings in handful of years since the assault weapons ban expired. And the vast majority of the most lethal of these shootings were all committed using an AR15.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...became-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice-w451452

The stats back up the fact that there is far more gun violence in the states with the least amount of gun regulations...

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/death-by-gun-top-20-states-with-highest-rates/19/

 

[BANGS]

there is no controversy with the desired outcome.

Wrong. There is plenty of controversy. Who decides what kind of background allows you to defend yourself? Who decides who is a "crazy"?

This is false, gun regulations have a big impact.

We have had an absolute explosion in mass shootings in handful of years since the assault weapons ban expired. And the vast majority of the most lethal of these shootings were all committed using an AR15.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...became-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice-w451452

The stats back up the fact that there is far more gun violence in the states with the least amount of gun regulations...

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/death-by-gun-top-20-states-with-highest-rates/19/

Correlation is not causation. Also the vast majority of homicides are committed with pistols. You can't pretend you care about gun violence and move to ban only "assault rifles"(aka scary looking guns). That means you only care about votes, jumping on some sensationalist shit. If you really cared about gun violence, you would push for much harsher penalties for those caught with illegal guns and/or blanket ban. But we can't actually hold the criminals responsible, only law abiding citizens...

 

[gioGAF]

This is false, gun regulations have a big impact.

We have had an absolute explosion in mass shootings in handful of years since the assault weapons ban expired. And the vast majority of the most lethal of these shootings were all committed using an AR15.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...became-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice-w451452

The stats back up the fact that there is far more gun violence in the states with the least amount of gun regulations...

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/death-by-gun-top-20-states-with-highest-rates/19/

You realize that "assault weapon" is a generic term made up by the media to label weapons that look a certain way. You realize that the so-called "assault weapon" ban did not inhibit the purchase of said weapons in general (it limited the purchase of weapons with enough characteristics but not the weapon type itself).

During the "assault weapon" ban, I could buy a weapon that is functionally identical to one that is an "assault weapon". The ban stopped nothing, it only led to changes in cosmetic features of said weapons. This is what people don't get, IT DID NOTHING. Any lower statistics are purely coincidental.

Why do you think shooters pick the AR15 when there are hundreds of different variations/models that do the SAME THING? Guess which one shows up on news coverage, guess which one is the bad boy on all social media?

 

[Nintendo Switch]

Wrong. There is plenty of controversy. Who decides what kind of background allows you to defend yourself? Who decides who is a "crazy"?



Correlation is not causation. Also the vast majority of homicides are committed with pistols. You can't pretend you care about gun violence and move to ban only "assault rifles"(aka scary looking guns). That means you only care about votes, jumping on some sensationalist shit. If you really cared about gun violence, you would push for much harsher penalties for those caught with illegal guns and/or blanket ban. But we can't actually hold the criminals responsible, only law abiding citizens...

Three day waiting periods, more comprehensive background checks and such are already proposed to reduce violence by pistols as well. The OP has list of effective laws being proposed to address this as well as clear cut ways to decide which rifles get banned and a fair process through which a person would not be allowed to purchase a gun.

You realize that "assault weapon" is a generic term made up by the media to label weapons that look a certain way. You realize that the so-called "assault weapon" ban did not inhibit the purchase of said weapons in general (it limited the purchase of weapons with enough characteristics but not the weapon type itself).

During the "assault weapon" ban, I could buy a weapon that is functionally identical to one that is an "assault weapon". The ban stopped nothing, it only led to changes in cosmetic features of said weapons. This is what people don't get, IT DID NOTHING. Any lower statistics are purely coincidental.

Why do you think shooters pick the AR15 when there are hundreds of different variations/models that do the SAME THING? Guess which one shows up on news coverage, guess which one is the bad boy on all social media?

I suggest reading the OP of the topic you are replying to. I already debunked this myth you just posted in the OP.

 

[gioGAF]

Wrong. There is plenty of controversy. Who decides what kind of background allows you to defend yourself? Who decides who is a "crazy"?

I'm sorry for not being clear, the outcome I was referring to is keeping innocent people from getting shot/killed. I think we can all agree on that one.

 

[TrainedRage]

Probably because Alaska is a bright red rural state.

It doesn’t fit the agenda of the NRA or Fox News to talk about the 25 bright red states that have much higher rates of crime and violence than both Illinois and Michigan...

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/crime-and-corrections/public-safety

Michigan and Illinois are 24 and 25 on the list. There are 25 mostly bright red states ranked lower on this list due to having significantly higher rates of crime.

The most populated states with the most and biggest cities, and the strictest gun regulations, all rank high in terms of public safety and rank very low in terms of violent crime.

I would agree but my experience has been NO media right or left talks about it. I would think places like CNN would be shouting this at people to show them it's not just inner city black guys that commit gun violence.

 

[gioGAF]

I suggest reading the OP of the topic you are replying to. I already debunked this myth you just posted in the OP.

I don't know what myth you think the opening post debunks.
- I said that the "assault weapon" ban was garbage and accomplished nothing because the same weapons were still available the whole time.
- I said the AR15 has seen a marked increase in popularity because of media exposure.
What part of this is debunked in the opening post?

 

[Nintendo Switch]

I don't know what myth you think the opening post debunks.
- I said that the "assault weapon" ban was garbage and accomplished nothing because the same weapons were still available the whole time.
- I said the AR15 has seen a marked increase in popularity because of media exposure.
What part of this is debunked in the opening post?

These assault rifles could be defined as anything that allows for accurate shooting of crowds from 100 yards away and can shoot over 12 bullets before having to reload (modded AR15s can shoot 40 bullets without having to reload giving less opportunity for good guys to come close enough to the shooter to stop them).

This kid was shooting up targets from all the way from one end of the hall way to the other end, to the point that four well trained police officers “good guys with a gun” and in fact most police officers would be afraid to even try to engage him until he uses up the ammo in his clip and has to reload.

The vegas shooter shot 300 people from over a 1000 yards away using rifles, extended ammo magazines and bump stocks that he bought legally. These are the weapons of cowards.

With a 8 shooter pistol, both would have had to be much closer to their targets and would have had to reload much more frequently providing ample opportunity for a large crowd of people that are being shot at to gang up and overpower the shooter.

And it’s a medical fact that people shot with a pistol are much more likely to survive than people shot up with these rifles.

But perhaps the most scientific way to define assault rifles specifically as those that have a long range of accuracy, can discharge over 12 rounds without needing to reload, and still manage to be deadlier than handguns as well documented by radiology scans of bullet wounds in the below article...

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/553937/

“I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the United States for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury, which I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ such as the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, gray bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the mass-shooting victims from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, and was bleeding extensively. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The reaction in the emergency room was the same. One of the trauma surgeons opened a young victim in the operating room, and found only shreds of the organ that had been hit by a bullet from an AR-15, a semiautomatic rifle that delivers a devastatingly lethal, high-velocity bullet to the victim. Nothing was left to repair—and utterly, devastatingly, nothing could be done to fix the problem. The injury was fatal.

A year ago, when a gunman opened fire at the Fort Lauderdale airport with a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun, hitting 11 people in 90 seconds, I was also on call. It was not until I had diagnosed the third of the six victims who were transported to the trauma center that I realized something out of the ordinary must have happened. The gunshot wounds were the same low-velocity handgun injuries that I diagnose every day; only their rapid succession set them apart. And all six of the victims who arrived at the hospital that day survived.

Routine handgun injuries leave entry and exit wounds and linear tracks through the victim’s body that are roughly the size of the bullet. If the bullet does not directly hit something crucial like the heart or the aorta, and the victim does not bleed to death before being transported to our care at the trauma center, chances are that we can save him. The bullets fired by an AR-15 are different: They travel at a higher velocity and are far more lethal than routine bullets fired from a handgun. The damage they cause is a function of the energy they impart as they pass through the body. A typical AR-15 bullet leaves the barrel traveling almost three times faster than—and imparting more than three times the energy of—a typical 9mm bullet from a handgun. An AR-15 rifle outfitted with a magazine with 50 rounds allows many more lethal bullets to be delivered quickly without reloading.

I have seen a handful of AR-15 injuries in my career. Years ago I saw one from a man shot in the back by a swat team. The injury along the path of the bullet from an AR-15 is vastly different from a low-velocity handgun injury. The bullet from an AR-15 passes through the body like a cigarette boat traveling at maximum speed through a tiny canal. The tissue next to the bullet is elastic—moving away from the bullet like waves of water displaced by the boat—and then returns and settles back. This process is called cavitation; it leaves the displaced tissue damaged or killed. The high-velocity bullet causes a swath of tissue damage that extends several inches from its path. It does not have to actually hit an artery to damage it and cause catastrophic bleeding. Exit wounds can be the size of an orange.“

 

[3rdman]

Agreed, there is no controversy with the desired outcome. I think the main problem lies with disingenuous solutions (ban assault weapons is stupid), better to focus on things like what you mentioned.

Personally I'd ban those as well but I would happily settle for the rest.

You see America? We can compromise!

 

[BANGS]

The OP has list of effective laws being proposed to address this as well as clear cut ways to decide which rifles get banned and a fair process through which a person would not be allowed to purchase a gun.

They aren't effective and are full of potential abuse as I've stated...

 

[gohepcat]

Because they aren't effective and can be abused... If you want to see how great America is regulating dangerous machines, just look at our awful motor vehicle situation...

??? Are you purposefully trying to sabotage your own argument?

We have cut the number of fatal car accidents in half over the last 20 years through stricter safety regulations.

This is the difference between regulation and less regulation:



You are pretty bad at this.

 

[Nintendo Switch]

They aren't effective and are full of potential abuse as I've stated...

That’s not true, but if you do see potential for abuse, if that has anything to do with why you oppose these laws, why not propose ways to fix those loopholes.

Why doesn’t the National GOP and the NRA if they actually gives a damn, actually work with democrats to fix loopholes and come up with better regulations instead of standing around like a brick wall blocking any and all gun regulations proposed.

 

[gioGAF]

These assault rifles could be defined as anything that allows for accurate shooting of crowds from 100 yards away and can shoot over 12 bullets before having to reload (modded AR15s can shoot 40 bullets without having to reload giving less opportunity for good guys to come close enough to the shooter to stop them).

This kid was shooting up targets from all the way from one end of the hall way to the other end, to the point that four well trained police officers “good guys with a gun” and in fact most police officers would be afraid to even try to engage him until he uses up the ammo in his clip and has to reload.

The vegas shooter shot 300 people from over a 1000 yards away using rifles, extended ammo magazines and bump stocks that he bought legally. These are the weapons of cowards.

With a 8 shooter pistol, both would have had to be much closer to their targets and would have had to reload much more frequently providing ample opportunity for a large crowd of people that are being shot at to gang up and overpower the shooter.

And it’s a medical fact that people shot with a pistol are much more likely to survive than people shot up with these rifles.

But perhaps the most scientific way to define assault rifles specifically as those that have a long range of accuracy, can discharge over 12 rounds without needing to reload, and still manage to be deadlier than handguns as well documented by radiology scans of bullet wounds in the below article...

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/553937/

“I have been a radiologist in one of the busiest trauma centers in the United States for 13 years, and have diagnosed thousands of handgun injuries to the brain, lung, liver, spleen, bowel, and other vital organs. I thought that I knew all that I needed to know about gunshot wounds, but the specific pattern of injury on my computer screen was one that I had seen only once before.

In a typical handgun injury, which I diagnose almost daily, a bullet leaves a laceration through an organ such as the liver. To a radiologist, it appears as a linear, thin, gray bullet track through the organ. There may be bleeding and some bullet fragments.

I was looking at a CT scan of one of the mass-shooting victims from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, who had been brought to the trauma center during my call shift. The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, and was bleeding extensively. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage?

The reaction in the emergency room was the same. One of the trauma surgeons opened a young victim in the operating room, and found only shreds of the organ that had been hit by a bullet from an AR-15, a semiautomatic rifle that delivers a devastatingly lethal, high-velocity bullet to the victim. Nothing was left to repair—and utterly, devastatingly, nothing could be done to fix the problem. The injury was fatal.

A year ago, when a gunman opened fire at the Fort Lauderdale airport with a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun, hitting 11 people in 90 seconds, I was also on call. It was not until I had diagnosed the third of the six victims who were transported to the trauma center that I realized something out of the ordinary must have happened. The gunshot wounds were the same low-velocity handgun injuries that I diagnose every day; only their rapid succession set them apart. And all six of the victims who arrived at the hospital that day survived.

Routine handgun injuries leave entry and exit wounds and linear tracks through the victim’s body that are roughly the size of the bullet. If the bullet does not directly hit something crucial like the heart or the aorta, and the victim does not bleed to death before being transported to our care at the trauma center, chances are that we can save him. The bullets fired by an AR-15 are different: They travel at a higher velocity and are far more lethal than routine bullets fired from a handgun. The damage they cause is a function of the energy they impart as they pass through the body. A typical AR-15 bullet leaves the barrel traveling almost three times faster than—and imparting more than three times the energy of—a typical 9mm bullet from a handgun. An AR-15 rifle outfitted with a magazine with 50 rounds allows many more lethal bullets to be delivered quickly without reloading.

I have seen a handful of AR-15 injuries in my career. Years ago I saw one from a man shot in the back by a swat team. The injury along the path of the bullet from an AR-15 is vastly different from a low-velocity handgun injury. The bullet from an AR-15 passes through the body like a cigarette boat traveling at maximum speed through a tiny canal. The tissue next to the bullet is elastic—moving away from the bullet like waves of water displaced by the boat—and then returns and settles back. This process is called cavitation; it leaves the displaced tissue damaged or killed. The high-velocity bullet causes a swath of tissue damage that extends several inches from its path. It does not have to actually hit an artery to damage it and cause catastrophic bleeding. Exit wounds can be the size of an orange.“

Okay, this doesn't debunk anything I said.

It provides a NEW definition for "assault weapon", one that is different than what is currently used by the media, states and federal government. I was referring to "assault weapons" as currently defined by the law.

While I don't agree with the call to ban in essence all semi-automatic rifles that is being proposed, I can at least say that what that person is proposing is a better definition than what is being used now.

The next segment deals with bullet damage, which has nothing to do with the rest of my post (AR15 use being fueled by propaganda). I'm not really arguing against the damage that a rifle round can cause.

Incidentally, would you happen to have a link to a more comprehensive study on bullet wounds? The link provided is to a heavily pro gun control media outlet that contains mostly anecdotal evidence from a "radiologist", and doesn't really offer much factual insight or detail (9 mm regular vs. hollow point, relative distance of victims that were shot from the shooter, different handgun calibers, vs. shotguns, etc.).

 

[BANGS]

??? Are you purposefully trying to sabotage your own argument?

We have cut the number of fatal car accidents in half over the last 20 years through stricter safety regulations.

This is the difference between regulation and less regulation:



You are pretty bad at this.

Cute. But I'm not arguing for complete lack of regulation. I'm arguing against the left's horrible ideas for regulation. Regulation certainly has helped curb car accidents, but the accidents we do have are out of control. People aren't allowed to drive because they owe money, but people with a history of drunk driving and accidents can. Every day you drive past at least one elderly citizen who looks like they don't even know where they are. The situation is awful, let's not sugarcoat it...

I'm more than happy with regulation for guns as well, but not these awful proposals that the left is bringing...

That’s not true, but if you do see potential for abuse, if that has anything to do with why you oppose these laws, why not propose ways to fix those loopholes.

Why doesn’t the National GOP and the NRA if they actually gives a damn, actually work with democrats to fix loopholes and come up with better regulations instead of standing around like a brick wall blocking any and all gun regulations proposed.

I'm not defending the GOP and/or NRA. They SHOULD be looking to fix problems, but they are too busy blocking the left's horrible proposals that they haven't put any effort into proposing something themselves...

 

[appaws]

I'm not defending the GOP and/or NRA. They SHOULD be looking to fix problems, but they are too busy blocking the left's horrible proposals that they haven't put any effort into proposing something themselves...

As an NRA and GOA life member, and a donor to JPFO, I'll propose something. Leave us the fuck alone. The reason we don't work with them to "fix" anything is because we are not stupid. There is no "common sense" regulation that will make them happy. Bloomberg, Rebecca Peters, Josh Sugarmann, etc. are zealots to destroy the second amendment, and won't be satisfied until civilians are disarmed. There is no compromise with these people. Go read the gun control threads at the "other place." That is who we are supposed to "compromise" with?

Until we commit a felony with a firearm, then impose mandatory penalties after due process is done....

Any felony committed with a firearm, First: 10 years with no possibility of parole.
Second: Twenty years with no possibility of parole.
Third: Life with no possibility of parole.

Now explain to me how people who claim to be against "gun violence" would be against this proposal.

As far as random shooters who come out of the woodwork...I hate it, but I think it is just an inescapable outcome for a country that has replaced God in public life with worship of self.

 

[ar0s]

Your congressman isn’t representing you then.

What does this mean? Your representative might be called that but if he represented the opinions of everyone he 'represents' at all times then he would have every possible position on every single issue.

 

[rokkerkory]

What does this mean? Your representative might be called that but if he represented the opinions of everyone he 'represents' at all times then he would have every possible position on every single issue.

Just look at the original person i quoted with his response

 

[blu]

As an NRA and GOA life member, and a donor to JPFO, I'll propose something. Leave us the fuck alone. The reason we don't work with them to "fix" anything is because we are not stupid.

Well, let's see..

There is no "common sense" regulation that will make them happy. Bloomberg, Rebecca Peters, Josh Sugarmann, etc. are zealots to destroy the second amendment, and won't be satisfied until civilians are disarmed. There is no compromise with these people. Go read the gun control threads at the "other place." That is who we are supposed to "compromise" with?

Until we commit a felony with a firearm, then impose mandatory penalties after due process is done....

Any felony committed with a firearm, First: 10 years with no possibility of parole.
Second: Twenty years with no possibility of parole.
Third: Life with no possibility of parole.

That's all you have? No background checks for people purchasing military-grade weaponry? No age limit for high-power rifles? Nothing of the sort, just a baseball '3rd time's a charm' tactic. How.. poetic?

Now explain to me how people who claim to be against "gun violence" would be against this proposal.

It's idiotic to its core, and as you like to put it, 'people are not stupid', that's why. How many firearm felonies did that kid have? The Vegas shooter?

As far as random shooters who come out of the woodwork...I hate it, but I think it is just an inescapable outcome for a country that has replaced God in public life with worship of self.

Ohhhhh, I see. Fuck those godless idiots, let them shoot themselves, I ain't giving up my founding-fathers-granted right to nuclear submarines.

'There's no compromise with these people'... How aptly put.

 

[JDB]

\
As far as random shooters who come out of the woodwork...I hate it, but I think it is just an inescapable outcome for a country that has replaced God in public life with worship of self.

Other godless countries seem to be doing alright.

 

[Future]

As far as random shooters who come out of the woodwork...I hate it, but I think it is just an inescapable outcome for a country that has replaced God in public life with worship of self.

That indicates some other motive behind your posts.

Background checks. Loopholes closed. How could anyone be against this. You’d still get your guns, just like you’d still get your job after their existing mandatory background checks. All the left in truth is asking for is some checks and limitations. Sure the farther left you go, the more extreme things people will want. But that goes for the right as well or any ideology. The fact that people have a hard time talking about ANY limitation whatsoever is what gets me

 

[ickythingz]

That indicates some other motive behind your posts.

Background checks. Loopholes closed. How could anyone be against this. You’d still get your guns, just like you’d still get your job after their existing mandatory background checks. All the left in truth is asking for is some checks and limitations. Sure the farther left you go, the more extreme things people will want. But that goes for the right as well or any ideology. The fact that people have a hard time talking about ANY limitation whatsoever is what gets me

What "gets you" is people losing their freedom. Very interesting

 

[appaws]

Well, let's see..

That's all you have? No background checks for people purchasing military-grade weaponry? No age limit for high-power rifles? Nothing of the sort, just a baseball '3rd time's a charm' tactic. How.. poetic?

What is "military grade?" And we already have a background check system. Age limit thing is unconstitutional and morally wrong. If you can fight and die for your country, you should have all rights and priveileges of citizenship. Yes that includes drinking alcohol.

Other godless countries seem to be doing alright.

Are they? I seem to recall hearing about some terrible massacres in other countries. How quickly we forget.

That indicates some other motive behind your posts.

Background checks. Loopholes closed. How could anyone be against this. You’d still get your guns, just like you’d still get your job after their existing mandatory background checks. All the left in truth is asking for is some checks and limitations. Sure the farther left you go, the more extreme things people will want. But that goes for the right as well or any ideology. The fact that people have a hard time talking about ANY limitation whatsoever is what gets me

I'm for background checks. We already have them. What anti-gunners call a "loophole" is actually just the fact of private sales. Of course they want to outlaw private sales and make criminals out of millions of good people. Dealers at gun shows have to do the same background checks that dealers do in their brick and mortar location.

"Some checks and limitations." LOL. Go read the latest era thread about this and see if that is all the left is asking for...? Not even close. Obama himself cited Australia as a model. Confiscations in America will equal blood. The Australian anti-gun regime would equal civil war and the end of the United States.

The goal is complete civilian disarmament. Everyone on both sides of the debate knows it, but the anti-gun zealots know that they can confuse the uninformed with the lie that they just want minor changes in the name of "safety." Or the name "gun show loophole" which is another lie to make it sound like there are no background checks at gun shows. Or the lie of "assault weapons" which even Josh Sugarmann admits is to confuse the public into thinking of machine guns. They can never make their case honestly because they know that the American public will never willingly give up a key part of the Bill of rights. Molon Labe.

 

[ar0s]

People losing "some" freedom is better than tens of thousands of people per year being shot. Would you take a bullet with a 1/3 chance of death to allow others assault weapons? Would your mother, your father, your child? Would you be happy if they got shot? You are not seeing it with any empathy.

 

[appaws]

People losing "some" freedom is better than tens of thousands of people per year being shot. Would you take a bullet with a 1/3 chance of death to allow others assault weapons? Would your mother, your father, your child? Would you be happy if they got shot? You are not seeing it with any empathy.

The reason you are wrong is that you are not taking the murderous tendencies of the state into account. It is the state who is the largest mass murderer in history and can never be equaled. Armed civilians could never come close in a billion years to the numbers of murders committed by the state in the twentieth century alone.

So empathy has nothing to do with anything. It is a kindness to nobody to disarm the law abiding and lodge a monopoly on deadly force in the hands of leviathan.

And how many constitutional rights are you willing to sacrifice in the name of public safety? How about the 4th Amendment? Stop and Frisk had some good effects where it was instituted, is that ok even if it violates people's rights? Shouldn't we allow the police to search houses and cars without a warrant in the name of public safety? How could you say no, don't you have empathy for crime victims?

 

[CreamCream]

The reason you are wrong is that you are not taking the murderous tendencies of the state into account. It is the state who is the largest mass murderer in history and can never be equaled. Armed civilians could never come close in a billion years to the numbers of murders committed by the state in the twentieth century alone.

So empathy has nothing to do with anything. It is a kindness to nobody to disarm the law abiding and lodge a monopoly on deadly force in the hands of leviathan.

And how many constitutional rights are you willing to sacrifice in the name of public safety? How about the 4th Amendment? Stop and Frisk had some good effects where it was instituted, is that ok even if it violates people's rights? Shouldn't we allow the police to search houses and cars without a warrant in the name of public safety? How could you say no, don't you have empathy for crime victims?

There's no good reason to have a gun.

 

[ar0s]

We have an equivelant of the fourth amendment in countries with no guns. And no tens of thousands of people being shot every year. One mass murderer every 40 years does not America make.

Do you really believe your own government is a serious threat to your welfare? What could they possibly do that they do not rampantly do now?

Instead of being satisfied you are A-okay because you have guns perhaps you should be thinking about what exactly would make you rise up and benefit from having the guns? Given your government is already many times worse, more unequal, more poverty, more agression, more warfare, more imperialism than the Third Reich/Soviet Union/British Empire/Roman Empire etc. etc. etc. and every other empire in history.

Your own government raping you does not involve them busting your door down and shooting you. It involves being forced to live in poverty, work multiple jobs at minimum wage, have no prospects, no future & no hope.

Look at your crumbling infrastructure. Look at the areas law enforcement dare not tread. Look at the towns with raw sewage spewing into the street. Look out your window.

Your worst nightmare has come true and noone even noticed.

If guns can protect you from reality then you are probably right and I want in.

Something tells me that guns are just your blanky though - creating an illusion of security and freedom when in reality there is none.

 

[appaws]

We have an equivelant of the fourth amendment in countries with no guns. And no tens of thousands of people being shot every year. One mass murderer every 40 years does not America make.

Do you really believe your own government is a serious threat to your welfare? What could they possibly do that they do not rampantly do now?

Instead of being satisfied you are A-okay because you have guns perhaps you should be thinking about what exactly would make you rise up and benefit from having the guns? Given your government is already many times worse, more unequal, more poverty, more agression, more warfare, more imperialism than the Third Reich/Soviet Union/British Empire/Roman Empire etc. etc. etc. and every other empire in history.

Your own government raping you does not involve them busting your door down and shooting you. It involves being forced to live in poverty, work multiple jobs at minimum wage, have no prospects, no future & no hope.

Look at your crumbling infrastructure. Look at the areas law enforcement dare not tread. Look at the towns with raw sewage spewing into the street. Look out your window.

Your worst nightmare has come true and noone even noticed.

If guns can protect you from reality then you are probably right and I want in.

Something tells me that guns are just your blanky though - creating an illusion of security and freedom when in reality there is none.

What is this dystopian vision of the U.S. that you have? More aggression than the Third Reich, sewage spewing into the streets...? LOL. As bad as you seem to think it is, isn't it amazing all the people trying to immigrate here by the millions? You'd think people would be fleeing East Germany style.

If you are trolling, nice job. If not, you are being fed some amazing bullshit about the most prosperous and freest country in the history of this planet. And nobody is taking my blanky.

 

[Future]

What "gets you" is people losing their freedom. Very interesting

Hard to even take this seriously since there already exists background checks that I suppose are already stealing freedom.

Frustrating thing about this debate is the exaggerations from all sides. On the furthest right you will get freedom nonsense like the above. On the furthest left you’ll get complete disarmament nonsense as well. There are discussions in the middle but people use the extremes as excuses to not even discuss it

 

[gioGAF]

People also need to understand statistics. The media always touts "gun deaths" in the US and talks about how horrible the statistics are. The supposed "gun deaths" in the US include suicides (which I'm guessing are a large reason for Alaska having so much "gun violence").

2/3 of these gun deaths are because of suicide. Seems to me like the problem lies elsewhere in our society, not with firearms. And before people come out to say that guns make those suicides happen, YOU ARE WRONG. Suicide rates are fairly constant even in populations with less availability of firearms, like the bastions of reason, safety and model firearm laws of the UK and Australia. Guess what, they just hang themselves instead, however it no longer counts as a gun death. Big whoop!

 

[Papa]

Can someone please give me a summary of what specific changes the children want?

 

[ickythingz]

Can someone please give me a summary of what specific changes the children want?

If you think the children are writing this narrative think again. Just copy paste any leftist ideologies that are promoted from that side of the party and you have your summary. These children are just reading scripts, literally in most cases. Who wrote them? Answer this and you will begin to understand.

These are young kids who have no clue what is going on. They are being used as puppets by the corrupt establishment to push an agenda. There is nothing interesting about any of this except that the general public remains easily fooled. Their youth makes them too ignorant of reality to see they are being played. I will quote this in 5 years if this still exists and lets see where these kids end up.

 

[Papa]

If you think the children are writing this narrative think again. Just copy paste any leftist ideologies that are promoted from that side of the party and you have your summary. These children are just reading scripts, literally in most cases. Who wrote them? Answer this and you will begin to understand.

These are young kids who have no clue what is going on. They are being used as puppets by the corrupt establishment to push an agenda. There is nothing interesting about any of this except that the general public remains easily fooled. Their youth makes them too ignorant of reality to see they are being played. I will quote this in 5 years if this still exists and lets see where these kids end up.

Alright, but whether the demands are coming directly from the children or someone else, can someone tell me specifically what they are?

 

[prag16]

Alright, but whether the demands are coming directly from the children or someone else, can someone tell me specifically what they are?

The usual. From what I've read it's mostly vague demands to "strengthen gun control" with specifics sparse but including banning "assault weapons". Skimming through some articles I really can't find much in the way of specific things they are demanding; just the assertion that the status quo is horrific, and what's under consideration now in the Florida legislature still isn't good enough. Somebody that has actually seen a list of specific proposals can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Papa]

The usual. From what I've read it's mostly vague demands to "strengthen gun control" with specifics sparse but including banning "assault weapons". Skimming through some articles I really can't find much in the way of specific things they are demanding; just the assertion that the status quo is horrific, and what's under consideration now in the Florida legislature still isn't good enough. Somebody that has actually seen a list of specific proposals can correct me if I'm wrong.

Ok thanks. Any reasonable person would want to prevent mentally ill people from obtaining guns and if there is currently no legislation for this, I think that needs to change. I’m not aware of what the law currently is though, so until someone can tell me that, I’m not ready to jump on board with the “we need to do something” post-crisis panic.

 

[ar0s]

What is this dystopian vision of the U.S. that you have? More aggression than the Third Reich, sewage spewing into the streets...? LOL. As bad as you seem to think it is, isn't it amazing all the people trying to immigrate here by the millions? You'd think people would be fleeing East Germany style.

If you are trolling, nice job. If not, you are being fed some amazing bullshit about the most prosperous and freest country in the history of this planet. And nobody is taking my blanky.

Read the UNHC (IIRC) report about poverty in USA. Sewage spilling onto the streets with a local government insisting they are not responsible for fixing it.

People are immigrating to Russia by the millions but I doubt you would say they are amazing and free?

That post is exactly my point - your blanky has blinded you to actual reality. Your society has grown you to have no empathy. How many wars have you supported in your lifetime?

The United States has invaded dozens more countries and destroyed more states than Hitler ever dreamed of.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

Read the UNHC (IIRC) report about poverty in USA. Sewage spilling onto the streets with a local government insisting they are not responsible for fixing it.

People are immigrating to Russia by the millions but I doubt you would say they are amazing and free?

That post is exactly my point - your blanky has blinded you to actual reality. Your society has grown you to have no empathy. How many wars have you supported in your lifetime?

The United States has invaded dozens more countries and destroyed more states than Hitler ever dreamed of.

So one local government in a nation of 350 million people says it all about the US. Brilliant.

 

[appaws]

Read the UNHC (IIRC) report about poverty in USA. Sewage spilling onto the streets with a local government insisting they are not responsible for fixing it.

People are immigrating to Russia by the millions but I doubt you would say they are amazing and free?

That post is exactly my point - your blanky has blinded you to actual reality. Your society has grown you to have no empathy. How many wars have you supported in your lifetime?

The United States has invaded dozens more countries and destroyed more states than Hitler ever dreamed of.

So, one anecdote about sewage spilling somewhere in the richest country in the world? You are going to need to do a little better than that to prove your case about what an unlivable hellhole the US is. Yes, there is poverty in the world. Yes, there is poverty in the US. But I daresay our poor our much better off than poor people elsewhere.

I haven't supported any wars in my lifetime, actually. Why do you make these crazy assumptions? I am an anti-interventionist.

I have empathy for all of the people around the world who don't have liberty. But I know that the temptations of the harlot known as government are difficult to resist, and that it is an accident of history that the American nation has these Lockean attitudes which are out of step with our European motherlands. But, that is OK...I'll take being an outlier with my human rights intact.

 

[blu]

What is "military grade?"

An army rifle, designed for battlefield action, to military specs. I thought that much was apparent.

And we already have a background check system.

You need a better one in place as the current one clearly doesn't work. Godless hippies or not.

Age limit thing is unconstitutional and morally wrong. If you can fight and die for your country, you should have all rights and priveileges of citizenship. Yes that includes drinking alcohol.

A 'privilege of citizenship' would be to be allowed to apply for a gun permit at the age of 25 (just an example), with the possibility to be denied based on various psycho-medical criteria. A privilege of citizenship is to drink at some age, and to drive at another (after obtaining a license, subject to revocation on authorities' discretion), and yet there's no 'privilege of citizenship' that allows you drink and drive -- 'privileges of citizenship' do not suppose whimsical application. The fact you might be fit to fight and die for your country does not automatically give you privileges to play with army rifles at your whim.

 

[Rudelord]

An army rifle, designed for battlefield action, to military specs. I thought that much was apparent.

Every gun design at some point was designed to military specs for use on a battlefield. Muskets were top of the line in their era, lever and bolt actions in another. Citizenry in the US were allowed to own them during those times as well.

 

[Alexander DeLarge]

We have an equivelant of the fourth amendment in countries with no guns. And no tens of thousands of people being shot every year. One mass murderer every 40 years does not America make.

How many of those countries are completely isolated? How many of those countries are bordering ruthless drug cartels? How many of those countries share a continent with some of the most dangerous places on the planet without a physical barrier or a militarized force in the way of making their way over?

Organized crime is praying for states to start making long guns illegal because that's where they'll step in and I would think it'd be just as accessible as drugs or alcohol throughout the prohibition-era.

 

[pramod]

Late to the thread...but has anyone pointed out to the OP that even regular pistols can have 15 rounds or more these days?

Seung Hui Cho killed 36 people with 2 Glocks and the people he killed were not helpless kids but adults actively trying to survive. So this idea that AR15s are much more deadly just doesnt add up.

 

[blu]

Every gun design at some point was designed to military specs for use on a battlefield. Muskets were top of the line in their era, lever and bolt actions in another. Citizenry in the US were allowed to own them during those times as well.

Erm, no? Hunting guns are designed for, you guessed it, hunting. Sports guns (marksmanship) are designed for target shooting, etc, etc. Not every gun (and corresponding ammo) is designed for the army, by far. Military guns from the second half of the 20th century (post WW2) and those from the 21st century deviate _largely_ from other types of guns. The fact US citizens were allowed to own a bolt action or a musket does not make a remote parallel to owning modern military armament.

Late to the thread...but has anyone pointed out to the OP that even regular pistols can have 15 rounds or more these days?

Seung Hui Cho killed 36 people with 2 Glocks and the people he killed were not helpless kids but adults actively trying to survive. So this idea that AR15s are much more deadly just doesnt add up.

And an AR-15 has magazines for 30 rounds. Magazine capacity is only one side of the story. Cartridges design is another. Yes, you can shoot 15 people with a handgun in a crowded place. But unless you shoot them all in the heads, the damage a pistol round incurs to human tissues is nowhere on the same scale a 5.65 NATO does.

 

[ar0s]

How many of those countries are completely isolated? How many of those countries are bordering ruthless drug cartels? How many of those countries share a continent with some of the most dangerous places on the planet without a physical barrier or a militarized force in the way of making their way over?

Organized crime is praying for states to start making long guns illegal because that's where they'll step in and I would think it'd be just as accessible as drugs or alcohol throughout the prohibition-era.

It says it all about your society that something as ubiquitous as drugs and alcohol, that almost everyone wants and will make an effort to get, would be as attractive to otherwise law abiding citizens as going off to an underground tavern to buy an artillery piece & 300 Kalashnikovs.

Europe shares a border with the middle east btw (saying continent is a bit sneaky since it's an overland crossing that creates access not continent) one of the most war ravaged areas on the planet and the population does not need guns. The "refugees" get in but so do all the illegal aliens to USA.

It's crazy that all of the arguments gun fanatics use as what-ifs already have been demonstrated to be rubbish through the rest of the world's experience but they stick to the arguments like it's a religion.

 

[zelo-ca]

I love that these kids are being paraded by the MSM when one of the students at Parkland (Kyle Kashuv) has been at DC, meeting with lawmakers and helping put together the Stop School Violence Act. He has done more since the shooting than any of those idiot kids on TV.

 

[PhendranaMama]

Calling school shooting survivors who have put in a TON of work while still grieving/coping idiots. Blaming the "MSM."

What a terrible post.

 

[zelo-ca]

Calling school shooting survivors who have put in a TON of work while still grieving/coping idiots. Blaming the "MSM."

What a terrible post.

I'm referencing the awful CNN townhall and the BS that it was. I'll prob edit my post to include that.