Support NeoGAF

[Littlegator]

why do you want and need the freedom to own assault weapons? are you forming a militia? living on the mexican border? why?

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

 

[sangreal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrlUsaYlKPs

It was a rhetorical question.

 

[coldfoot]

IIRC getting a gun in NJ is even more difficult than NY.
Still can't see why you can't devise a simple national system that does an instant background check, then couple that with a psych evaluation, you can get a gun. The psychiatrist would also enter your results in the database, and when you go to the gun store, they check everything is in order electonically and sell you whatever gun you want right there.

Second hand sales would also have to take place in these locations so the buyer can get checked. Gun shows would also need to use this as well. If you just casually sell your gun to a friend, it is legally yours and you're responsible for any crimes committed with it.

And you know what, fuck states' rights. If they don't need a passport to enter my state, they don't get to have radically different laws where they live compared to mine. It's also funny most people who go "but but but states' rights" live in states that receive more money from the Federal government than they put in, so if they want that, they can stop accepting Federal money.

 

[soundscream]

IIRC getting a gun in NJ is even more difficult than NY.
Still can't see why you can't devise a simple national system that does an instant background check, then couple that with a psych evaluation, you can get a gun. The psychiatrist would also enter your results in the database, and when you go to the gun store, they check everything is in order electonically and sell you whatever gun you want right there.

Second hand sales would also have to take place in these locations so the buyer can get checked. Gun shows would also need to use this as well. If you just casually sell your gun to a friend, it is legally yours and you're responsible for any crimes committed with it.

NJ doesn't even follow the gun laws they have. Its supposed to take 30days but it almost always takes months.

 

[Hex]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

Do you understand that the world where the US Constitution was created was a much different world and a much different country?
When is the next militia rolling in?
Do you also understand that most of the country could not tell you much about the Constitution if their lives depended on it unless it serves their purpose?


As far as banning guns stopping psychopaths , looking at the rest of the world I would say that it couldn't hurt.

 

[diehard]

terrible tragedy.

i thought we had a gun control thread?

 

[genjiZERO]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

Practical realities of guns already flooding the country aside, to answer your question, no, but at least it would make it a lot more difficult for them to do so. If guns aren't part of the problem then why don't you have these sort of problems in other first world countries where guns are illegal?

 

[Kelthink]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

You are aware the founding fathers weren't godlike creatures with infinite wisdom, aren't you

 

[diffusionx]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

Like I said, these people died so Littlegator can be free.

 

[theignoramus]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

But there was a 10 year federal ban on assault weapons. why are you bringing up the Constitution? Im talking specifically about assault weapons and why you feel private citizens should own them.

 

[pompidu]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

Crazy is crazy but banning guns will infact decrease the amount of deaths from gun violence.

 

[Littlegator]

Like I said, these people died so Littlegator can be free.

No, they died because someone killed them. They would have gone on a killing spree regardless of what weapon was available to them.

But there was a 10 year federal ban on assault weapons. why are you bringing up the Constitution? Im talking specifically about assault weapons and why you feel private citizens should own them.

You're specifically talking about banning assault rifles because there is a possibility of people using them to kill. Do you also want swords, knives, baseball bats, and steel pipes banned?

Weapons are weapons. People can use weapons for bad things. Why do you want to ban guns?

I'm talking about the Constitution because you're talking about banning guns to try and solve an issue that's already illegal. Assault is illegal. Murder is illegal. Making guns illegal won't stop people from doing these illegal things. (No, I'm not saying they'll still have guns, I'm just saying they'll still do illegal things.)

Banning guns is removing everyone's ability to own guns in exchange for a false sense of security.

Crazy is crazy but banning guns will infact decrease the amount of deaths from gun violence.

Yes, that's fairly obvious. It won't, however, decrease the amount of deaths from violence in general.

Did you even read my argument?

 

[Ovid]

Three dead including gunman. Why is this happening every week? Am i just taking more notice?

Yes.

Another 13 year old got shot in Brooklyn last night and a 29-year old woman died while walking home from work. Why isn't anyone up in arms about that?

 

[pompidu]

No, they died because someone killed them. They would have gone on a killing spree regardless of what weapon was available to them.



You're specifically talking about banning assault rifles because there is a possibility of people using them to kill. Do you also want swords, knives, baseball bats, and steel pipes banned?

Weapons are weapons. People can use weapons for bad things. Why do you want to ban guns?

I'm talking about the Constitution because you're talking about banning guns to try and solve an issue that's already illegal. Assault is illegal. Murder is illegal. Making guns illegal won't stop people from doing these illegal things. (No, I'm not saying they'll still have guns, I'm just saying they'll still do illegal things.)

Banning guns is removing everyone's ability to own guns in exchange for a false sense of security.



Yes, that's fairly obvious. It won't, however, decrease the amount of deaths from violence in general.

Did you even read my argument?

Yes it does decrease the amount of deaths and if you Google search you will see those statistics.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Crazy is crazy but banning guns will infact decrease the amount of deaths from gun violence.

How will you confiscate all of those guns?

 

[rexor0717]

Wow, it wont stop. This is very tragic.
Seems like we need a Mass Shooting |OT|, this is happening much too frequently.

 

[theignoramus]

No, they died because someone killed them. They would have gone on a killing spree regardless of what weapon was available to them.



You're specifically talking about banning assault rifles because there is a possibility of people using them to kill. Do you also want swords, knives, baseball bats, and steel pipes banned?

Weapons are weapons. People can use weapons for bad things. Why do you want to ban guns?

I'm talking about the Constitution because you're talking about banning guns to try and solve an issue that's already illegal. Assault is illegal. Murder is illegal. Making guns illegal won't stop people from doing these illegal things. (No, I'm not saying they'll still have guns, I'm just saying they'll still do illegal things.)

Banning guns is removing everyone's ability to own guns in exchange for a false sense of security.



Yes, that's fairly obvious. It won't, however, decrease the amount of deaths from violence in general.

Did you even read my argument?

nice strawman. all of those objects have a civilian application. more importantly, for the most part, they're not instruments of warfare like the way an AK is. I mean, the AK is clearly designed with one thing in mind; to assault multiple targets, quickly and efficiently. To act as if there's no difference between firearms intended for hunting and self defense and firearms designed to to put down armed (and armoured) men is really disingenuous.

 

[SouthernDragon]

This is just the price we pay, collectively, for increasingly lax standards for gun ownership.

 

[pompidu]

How will you confiscate all of those guns?

Recycling centers. All registered handguns need to be disposed in a certain amount of time or you will face jail time.
I'm not saying we should ban all guns. Just guns that load bullets in the chamber automatically.

 

[Zeppu]

nice strawman. all of those objects have a civilian application. more importantly, for the most part, they're not instruments of warfare like the way an AK is. I mean, the AK is clearly designed with one thing in mind; to assault multiple targets, quickly and efficiently.

He's right though. Weapons are weapons which is why it's legal to have tanks, flame throwers, nuclear warheads, etc...

 

[Hex]

No, they died because someone killed them. They would have gone on a killing spree regardless of what weapon was available to them.

I have news for you, it is far far easier to pull the trigger on someone than it is to walk up to someone and stab them.
It is far less personal, and it is far "safer" for the coward who does it.
Someone with a knife or even a sword is far more likely to get tackled or taken down by a group than someone with a gun especially a rifle or shotgun.

Hyperbole like this

Do you also want swords, knives, baseball bats, and steel pipes banned?

is desperation and really sad misdirection.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Recycling centers. All registered handguns need to be disposed in a certain amount of time or you will face jail time.
I'm not saying we should ban all guns. Just guns that load bullets in the chamber automatically.

You know only a few states register handguns. What happens when most people ignore it.

 

[TheRagnCajun]

No, they died because someone killed them. They would have gone on a killing spree regardless of what weapon was available to them.



You're specifically talking about banning assault rifles because there is a possibility of people using them to kill. Do you also want swords, knives, baseball bats, and steel pipes banned?

Weapons are weapons. People can use weapons for bad things. Why do you want to ban guns?

I'm talking about the Constitution because you're talking about banning guns to try and solve an issue that's already illegal. Assault is illegal. Murder is illegal. Making guns illegal won't stop people from doing these illegal things. (No, I'm not saying they'll still have guns, I'm just saying they'll still do illegal things.)

Banning guns is removing everyone's ability to own guns in exchange for a false sense of security.



Yes, that's fairly obvious. It won't, however, decrease the amount of deaths from violence in general.

Did you even read my argument?

You don't see the difference between a lead pipe and an AK-47?

Following your logic, it should be okay for people to make and possess bombs, so long as they don't use them to commit a crime.

 

[MThanded]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

Rubio and Ryan at the RNC just told me rights where God given. Who are these founding fathers you speak of?

 

[pompidu]

You know only a few states register handguns. What happens when most people ignore it.

I am not apart of the gun culture, I don't know the process or regulations for gun control in all the states. There are a lot of variables to deal with when considering abolishing guns; probably more than I can think up and it is best left to people who have experience with firearms to regulate these things. Imo I would immediately ban the sale of all handguns , automatic weapons and such. Also a ban on the sale of individual handgun, automatic weapon parts. Is this the end all be all answer ? No but it would be a good start.

 

[massoluk]

No, they died because someone killed them. They would have gone on a killing spree regardless of what weapon was available to them.

Ok, if you must choose, who would rather have go on a murder rampage, a guy with a gun or a guy with a knife.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I am not apart of the gun culture, I don't know the process or regulations for gun control in all the states. There are a lot of variables to deal with when considering abolishing guns; probably more than I can think up and it is best left to people who have experience with firearms to regulate these things. Imo I would immediately ban the sale of all handguns , automatic weapons and such. Also a ban on the sale of individual handgun, automatic weapon parts. Is this the end all be all answer ? No but it would be a good start.

You know that's unenforceable, unconstitutional, and would provoke massive amounts of violence.

I'll give you credit for admitting that you aren't knowledgeable about the rules bad laws, others treat admitting it as if it gives you cancer.

I will add that legally automatic weapons have only been used in 3 crimes since 1934 and two were cops.

 

[Enron]

An AK47 is an assault weapon, right?

How the fuck is it even logically legal to acquire an AK-47?!

I can just feel the pro gun gaf readying a reply like, "How is it logically legal to acquire a Ferrari?! ". Smh....

If its not full auto, its legal. I can go down to the local gun store right now and pick a couple up, no questions asked.

Not in New Jersey.

Just for kicks, i looked up the rules in NJ surrounding assault weapons - you can actually own an ak47 clone in jersey. You can't

1. own an actual ak47
2. own a clone with any assault weapon features (flash supressor, folding stock, hi-cap magazine, fully auto, bayonet hardpoint, etc)

So if this was an AK47 clone (which there are millions of) it just needs to be vanilla and not have a magazine with greater than 10 or 15 rounds and it will be perfectly legal in jersey. My guess is that the ak47 mentioned in the article was a legal one.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Just for kicks, i looked up the rules in NJ surrounding assault weapons - you can actually own an ak47 clone in jersey. You can't

1. own an actual ak47
2. own a clone with any assault weapon features (flash supressor, folding stock, hi-cap magazine, fully auto, bayonet hardpoint, etc)

So if this was an AK47 clone (which there are millions of) it just needs to be vanilla and not have a magazine with greater than 10 or 15 rounds and it will be perfectly legal in jersey. My guess is that the ak47 mentioned in the article was a legal one.

Yeah NJ legal crippled weapons are so awful. Thankfully I live in PA so if I want a SCAR the only issue is money.

 

[J-Rzez]

I am not apart of the gun culture, I don't know the process or regulations for gun control in all the states. There are a lot of variables to deal with when considering abolishing guns; probably more than I can think up and it is best left to people who have experience with firearms to regulate these things. Imo I would immediately ban the sale of all handguns , automatic weapons and such. Also a ban on the sale of individual handgun, automatic weapon parts. Is this the end all be all answer ? No but it would be a good start.

It'd be a good start to and for who? Those people who have to use a hunting rifle for home defense? Those who carry for personal protection who now can not because you can't put a bolt action rifle in your coat, pocket, paddle holster, or purse? Stop thinking about yourself, because you're not thinking about "others" as much as you think you are.

If you're from the States, especially a prominent conceal-carry one, you've been around guns far more often than you think and you're ok. Anything can be used as a weapon, some to a potentially more devastating effect.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/30/100-year-old-driver-jumps-curb-near-elementary-school-9-childre/

Anti-CAR GAF unite.

 

[pompidu]

You know that's unenforceable, unconstitutional, and would provoke massive amounts of violence.

I'll give you credit for admitting that you aren't knowledgeable about the rules bad laws, others treat admitting it as if it gives you cancer.

I will add that legally automatic weapons have only been used in 3 crimes since 1934 and two were cops.

And honestly, if you want to shoot your AK, scar, whatever gun it may be at a firing range go nuts. I am all for freedoms and rights for people but something has to be done about gun violence. People are stupid. Stupid people with guns become dangerous. We need to focus on removing stupid, unsafe people from their guns. And I do realize most people aren't stupid wild west types shooting off guns everywhere.

 

[Axiology]

Okay, to those who say "Don't be fooled! Murders are actually decreasing across the country! There's just more reporting of them!", that may be true but in comparing this country to others there is still a disproportionately large number of them.

And it's not because America is so big. There are larger countries and higher population densities out there and they still don't have the amount of violent crime we do. Regardless of whether there is one solution to the issue or what that issue may actually be caused by, there is definitely something wrong here.

And to those comparing the amounts of violent crime now to those "before", are you saying the amount of mass killings is lower now than in the last couple of years when we had the same amount of reporting, but seemingly fewer stories of this sort? I'm not saying there is a definite rise. It's possible it happened just as much in the last couple of years, I'm just wondering if it has.

Edit:

I'm as anti-gun as it gets but this kind of stuff (as in this kind of situation like in Old Bridge) would be the same whether the perp used a gun, knife, axe, broken glass bottle, whatever. He went there in the morning with the intent of killing others and it looks like himself as well. While a gun is obviously a more convenient tool for that task, the truth is there's nothing you can do to prevent someone who is determined to harm others and is willing to die for it.

I don't really think this sort of logic cuts it. I doubt a lone murderer would get nearly as far as some of the notorious killers of the past couple years have if they weren't using guns. I don't know, do you think the Virginia Tech shooting or the Aurora incident would have gotten nearly as far as they did (20+ deaths) if they were using a broken bottle or knife instead? I can't see that.

Obviously one could make the case that even with the strictest of gun laws these people would still have gotten their hands on one, but that's not the point. Dismissing all violence as "equal" is disingenuous. There are few situations in which a man who is out to kill others is at more of an advantage than when he has a gun. Bombs are one of them, but they are far too inconvenient to make to serve for the average criminal, and in fact have often killed fewer in isolated incidents than simple firearms.

Edit again: I see you specifically stated incidents "like the Old Bridge", separating it from the mass shootings I listed above. I still don't think it would necessarily be the same, but it was a little off for me to list the other mass shootings with higher casualties. Still, once you're using a knife the amount of killing potential you have is dramatically reduced. I just can't see a guy getting away with stabbing 5+ adults at once. If he did it would take way more work and way more time than shooting 5+ at least. Even in situations like the Empire State incident, a knife could have reduced the violence because it would take more time for the guy to murder the first man, possibly trapping him in the area for a moment, or when he pulled the knife on the cops they would be able to react more appropriately, with more restraint, because the man was not waving a gun right at them.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Doesn't change the fact murders are down and so is gun violence even with gun sales up.

 

[Enron]

the Violent Crime rate in 1991 was truly shocking. 758.2 per 100k. It was 403.6 in 2010.

 

[(._.)]

we need more laws in the US it's not our culture or the media nope not at all

 

[Marleyman]

Doesn't change the fact murders are down and so is gun violence even with gun sales up.

Gun sales are up because idiots think Obama will take their guns.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Gun sales are up because idiots think Obama will take their guns.

Actually a lot of the sales drive is coming from new first time owners. Sorry to disappoint you.

 

[Marleyman]

Actually a lot of the sales drive is coming from new first time owners. Sorry to disappoint you.

Right; people who are believing scare tactics and want to arm themselves. You know, when Obama and his minions go door to door to collect guns.

 

[faceless007]

Actually a lot of the sales drive is coming from new first time owners. Sorry to disappoint you.

That doesn't contradict what he said. People are buying guns for the first time because they're afraid if they wait Obama will outlaw them.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

That doesn't contradict what he said. People are buying guns for the first time because they're afraid if they wait Obama will outlaw them.

When many are African Americans and minorities it does.

Right; people who are believing scare tactics and want to arm themselves. You know, when Obama and his minions go door to door to collect guns.

No, but if you want to think that you can., this is a free country after all.

 

[Jackpot]

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

Of course. Crimes of passion and mass-attacks are much harder to turn into killings with just knives. Unless you think every psychopath is a well-connected criminal with links to the black market.

and lol at invoking the founding fathers.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Of course. Crimes of passion and mass-attacks are much harder to turn into killings with just knives. Unless you think every psychopath is a well-connected criminal with links to the black market.

and lol at invoking the founding fathers.

There are currently 270 MILLION opened civilIan guns...so no it wont do anything.

 

[Marleyman]

No, but if you want to think that you can., this is a free country after all.

No? I hear the scare tactics on talk radio and other similar outlets. It is a fact that that scare tactic has been used since Obama took office and I know it won't subside. It sure is effective, as gun sales have risen as you pointed out.

 

[Jeramii]

seriously... 4th mass shooting since the end of July. this is absolutely awful.

on top of that. about two months ago in my state (utah) there was a man who walked out of a grocery store and just started stabbing random people. luckily a guy with a concealed weapon permit saw this going down and challenged the man who was stabbing people before things got worse.

it's just all too depressing to see these things happening.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

every week I come to OT I see this. I seriously want guns banned in the US.

 

[Raist]

Do you also want swords, knives, baseball bats, and steel pipes banned?

On which planet are these equivalent to guns in any way?

 

[TheRagnCajun]

There are currently 270 MILLION opened civilIan guns...so no it wont do anything.

If guns were ever outlawed, yes there would still be a lot of guns out there. It would be a slow purging process. It may take a whole generation before its actually hard to get a gun. It don't see this as a reason to not make changes, however.

 

[Miles X]

nice strawman. all of those objects have a civilian application. more importantly, for the most part, they're not instruments of warfare like the way an AK is. I mean, the AK is clearly designed with one thing in mind; to assault multiple targets, quickly and efficiently. To act as if there's no difference between firearms intended for hunting and self defense and firearms designed to to put down armed (and armoured) men is really disingenuous.

Not to mention it's much much harder for someone to defend themselves from someone with a gun Vs those other .. weapons.

 

[Deified Data]

Do you understand the purpose of the US Constitution?

It's not to allocate what freedoms are necessary. It's to remove only what's necessary. Taking away rights is the most slippery slope there is, and the founding fathers knew this.

Again I ask, will banning guns stop psychopaths from killing people?

No, it'll make it harder, which is the best we can do. I'm not for the banning of guns outright (I'm quite against it, in fact), but you bet I support the strictest screening methods possible. If I were a gun enthusiast, I wouldn't want incidents like this popping up and tarnishing the good name of my hobby. Can the psychos get their guns elsewhere? Sure. But to some, to me, there's a world of difference between "he scrounged it up illegally" and "he bought it at a gun show in less than 5 minutes, no questions asked".

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

If guns were ever outlawed, yes there would still be a lot of guns out there. It would be a slow purging process. It may take a whole generation before its actually hard to get a gun. It don't see this as a reason to not make changes, however.

The constitution is a good reason.