• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

The Biden Gun Plan

Musky_Cheese

Community Liaison
Oct 23, 2016
9,461
20,890
1,185
My biggest beef with the gun lobbies and some owners is that that they no longer are willing to compromise.
Lets examine that.

The 2nd says "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."

Infringe : verb (used with object), in·fringed, in·fring·ing. to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress

So we went from no restriction to current times... and gun owners stubbornness is the problem?
 

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
My biggest beef with the gun lobbies and some owners is that that they no longer are willing to compromise.

Ignoring for the moment the existence of things like the NFA, the Clinton Assault Weapon Ban (AWB), NICS checks, ATF ability to arbitrarily do whatever they want with the power of law. So let's just set aside the long history of concessions made by gun owners and the 2A up until this point.

Compromise means we, gun owners, get something out of the deal. What is in it for us? And the 'the deal' can't be 'well you get to keep having guns but we're going to add more restrictions'. That isn't a compromise or an equitable deal, as the gun owners are giving but not getting.

For instance, say the other side wants 'mandatory training' for all gun owners? The only way I'd even be willing to have a conversation about it is if the other side puts something on the table that I care about, like repealing the NFA entirely and cutting out the ATF regarding firearm laws and regulations.
 
Last edited:

HeresJohnny

Member
Mar 14, 2018
9,443
21,439
705
Thankfully the liberals ‘peaceful protests’ and defund the police movement led to millions of first time gun owners which has greatly strengthened the 2nd amendment.
Yeah, that's what gets me. How fucking tone deaf does Joe Biden have to be when his party just finished telling us the cops suck and encouraging lawlessness, and now he thinks we'll give up our guns? Seriously fucking tone deaf. Like, why would anyone ever side with the people who want to get rid of cops and let all the bad guys out of jail?
 
Last edited:

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
12,332
1,270
1,350
USA
It's so arbitrary and ridiculous these things they come up with to classify these weapons they clearly know nothing about. It still shoots 5.56, and they think a bayonet lug and a pistol grip make it less deadly lol.
That door swings both ways though, the customizability and the military 'look' are a big selling point for the AR 15.
 

highrider

Member
Dec 18, 2010
11,388
6,488
1,155
53
washington d.c.
His plan is to ban Assault Rifle 15 semi-automatic high capacity clips. It's simple, really.

High capacity clips are not limited to AR15 rifles. It is simple, simple as in made by a simple person that doesn’t comprehend small arms. There’s already multiple makes of semiautomatic 5.56 weapons that do everything an AR15 does but looks like a regular hunting rifle. Is it just the big, black scary guns or.. 🤔
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: HeresJohnny

Vanish

Member
Jul 23, 2007
1,233
204
1,210
NJ
HAHAHAHA you funny you know that. I read the politicfact article. Did crime stop or decrease with the ban? No the levels went up. Up as a increase. do you see that in your article?
"The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported that armed robberies increased by 20% (not 44%), but the number involving firearms decreased to a six-year low of 19%. " HAHAHAHAHAHA thats not fucking good.

"There were 132,297 victims of assault in Australia – a 6% increase from 1997 (not 9.6% as the post states), the organization says. Assaults had been on the rise for years." See that funny word again "increase" weird right

fuck if you look at the graph you posted with the crime stats, the gun ban has no effect

I meant crime overall has gone down and less guns are being used in all these crimes. Less guns being used in crimes, the better. Plus America has the most gun violence among 1st world countries and also the least gun control.
 

rorepmE

Member
Jan 20, 2019
1,042
2,104
430
Republic of Val Verde
Question: What do you need high cap mags for?

:sees the throngs of people burning down private property shouting to defund the police while local leaders tell said police to stand down:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tesseract

O.v.e.rlord

Member
Oct 8, 2014
2,571
578
690
Overall it's down. Just look at how much homicides had decreased. I'm sure it helps not to have guns so freely available.
your argument in the beginning was Australia banned guns, decreasing crime. We looked at your article and saw no correlation between crime and gun control. In fact crime went up. Now you pivot your point and say "MuRiCa BAd at gun crimes." where a majority are people off thing themselves. just come out and say. "I want guns gone because you dont like them."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dacon

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
I meant crime overall has gone down and less guns are being used in all these crimes. Less guns being used in crimes, the better. Plus America has the most gun violence among 1st world countries and also the least gun control.

We have a population of over 330 million, for starters. Second, we have very little in common with other first world countries as we are not Europe or Scandinavia. We have more in common in terms of ethnic make up/fractionalization with South America and the former combloc than we do Europe.



The more diverse a country the more 'social friction' exists. Now I'm not saying that therefore all diversity is bad, but what I am saying is that the negative side effect here is is a reduced level of social trust and cohesion, and this is also a factor for crime when you look at a society. America has alot of different groups of people trying and learning to get along, and this isn't shared with many of our 'first world' peers.
 
Last edited:

GaviotaGrande

Member
Jun 11, 2019
3,440
9,511
675
I’m glad you can at least acknowledge it. Knowing you’re not funny is an important first step 👍
Well, few people seemed to like it. It will not be funny, if you fail to understand it. Simple people won't.

High capacity clips are not limited to AR15 rifles. It is simple, simple as in made by a simple person that doesn’t comprehend small arms. There’s already multiple makes of semiautomatic 5.56 weapons that do everything an AR15 does but looks like a regular hunting rifle. Is it just the big, black scary guns or.. 🤔
First and foremost: if you want to be treated seriously when talking about guns, don't say clips. These are magazines. Also, almost every gun sold out there is "semi-automatic". Semi-automatic means: you pull the trigger once, one bullet comes out.
 

ERMint13

Member
May 28, 2014
645
412
550
Philly
Most gun deaths in the U.S. are suicide. Gun's are the quickest, fastest, least painful way generally. There is also no going back once you pull the trigger. I've known people who have taken huge amounts of pills to OD and have a moment of clarity and call 911.

Almost 24,000 gun deaths in 2017 in the U.S. were suicide. That's 60% of all gun deaths in the U.S. that year.

No magazine ban will solve those deaths. Also the idea that high capacity magazines mean more death is grossly misguided. I'm a gun owner. I can swap magazines in less than four seconds and I'm not near as proficient as most gun owners. It takes anyone with training about 2 seconds to swap mags.

Remove the suicide rate and we can discuss gun deaths due to violence if you'd like but sadly most gun death in the US is handgun not long gun so again not much would be impacted.
 

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
Most gun deaths in the U.S. are suicide. Gun's are the quickest, fastest, least painful way generally. There is also no going back once you pull the trigger. I've known people who have taken huge amounts of pills to OD and have a moment of clarity and call 911.

Almost 24,000 gun deaths in 2017 in the U.S. were suicide. That's 60% of all gun deaths in the U.S. that year.

No magazine ban will solve those deaths. Also the idea that high capacity magazines mean more death is grossly misguided. I'm a gun owner. I can swap magazines in less than four seconds and I'm not near as proficient as most gun owners. It takes anyone with training about 2 seconds to swap mags.

Remove the suicide rate and we can discuss gun deaths due to violence if you'd like but sadly most gun death in the US is handgun not long gun so again not much would be impacted.

True. This is one of the biggest shell games on the subject: people count suicides in their gun death statistics and therefore drastically inflate them in order to push their point.

As though people would only kill themselves because they had a gun. Granted, a suicidally depressed person may be more likely if he has a handgun sitting right there but you have to ask yourself: Why is he suicidally depressed in the first place? We're treating a deep seated cancer with topical ointments and band aids.
 

Mista K

Member
Oct 5, 2010
3,869
3,764
1,240
U.S.
Most gun deaths in the U.S. are suicide. Gun's are the quickest, fastest, least painful way generally. There is also no going back once you pull the trigger. I've known people who have taken huge amounts of pills to OD and have a moment of clarity and call 911.

Almost 24,000 gun deaths in 2017 in the U.S. were suicide. That's 60% of all gun deaths in the U.S. that year.

No magazine ban will solve those deaths. Also the idea that high capacity magazines mean more death is grossly misguided. I'm a gun owner. I can swap magazines in less than four seconds and I'm not near as proficient as most gun owners. It takes anyone with training about 2 seconds to swap mags.

Remove the suicide rate and we can discuss gun deaths due to violence if you'd like but sadly most gun death in the US is handgun not long gun so again not much would be impacted.
Exactly. Gun regulation isn't going to solve a mental health crisis and all the issues that contribute to it.
 

poppabk

Member
Jan 21, 2008
12,332
1,270
1,350
USA
people like good looks and aesthetics. No one wants to buy an ugly gun.
You see the irony though, right. Pro and anti gun owners are in total agreement that the AR 15 looks bad-ass, they just disagree on whether that is a good thing or not.
 

highrider

Member
Dec 18, 2010
11,388
6,488
1,155
53
washington d.c.
Well, few people seemed to like it. It will not be funny, if you fail to understand it. Simple people won't.


First and foremost: if you want to be treated seriously when talking about guns, don't say clips. These are magazines. Also, almost every gun sold out there is "semi-automatic". Semi-automatic means: you pull the trigger once, one bullet comes out.

Perhaps you can relate to me your small arms experience. This should get entertaining. I’m already not taking you seriously. You might start with an understanding of semiautomatic. Kind of like in the military you never call it a gun, it’s semantics.
 
Last edited:

MrMephistoX

Member
May 18, 2007
5,959
3,134
1,410
Lets examine that.

The 2nd says "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."

Infringe : verb (used with object), in·fringed, in·fring·ing. to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress

So we went from no restriction to current times... and gun owners stubbornness is the problem?
Its preaching to the choir. NICS is a success story background checks do work but it should be strengthened not completely done away with since its an “infringement”.
 

GaviotaGrande

Member
Jun 11, 2019
3,440
9,511
675
Kind of like in the military you never call it a gun, it’s semantics.
Topic of this thread literally says "The Biden Gun Plan". :messenger_grinning_sweat: That's why I used this specific word. We're not in military. We're on internet forum.

It's not a gun. it's a firearm. Sir, yes, sir!
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Dacon

MrMephistoX

Member
May 18, 2007
5,959
3,134
1,410
What is wrong with the current background checks?

Good explanation here:

 

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
Good explanation here:


Private transactions requiring background checks are unenforceable. There's not enough manpower and local law enforcement has zero interest in helping out the feds on something so obviously ill conceived. This sort of thing has been pushed on the state level a few times, and during the last such incident iirc the state sheriffs said that they 'wont be enforcing it, if it happens'. Nor were the feds particularly interested either because its not like they have the staffing or funding to try and snoop all over the place and figure out who sold a gun to their brother or best friend.

If you want mandatory background checks on a personal transaction level, that's actually enforceable, I'm curious to hear your suggestions. What exactly are you proposing here? And I most sincerely hope the response isn't 'well first we create a database of gun owners and serial numbers..'.
 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,675
14,958
1,650
True. This is one of the biggest shell games on the subject: people count suicides in their gun death statistics and therefore drastically inflate them in order to push their point.

As though people would only kill themselves because they had a gun. Granted, a suicidally depressed person may be more likely if he has a handgun sitting right there but you have to ask yourself: Why is he suicidally depressed in the first place? We're treating a deep seated cancer with topical ointments and band aids.

They are using the muh mental health thing as a backdoor way to ban guns, that is what the "red flag" laws are all about.

Soon enough a "red flag" will be if you don't support BLM, or made a joke about CHOP in the summer, and as such you have a public health problem of "racism" (remember this is what the left was saying post-George Floyd) and cannot legally own a gun.
 

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
They are using the muh mental health thing as a backdoor way to ban guns, that is what the "red flag" laws are all about.

Soon enough a "red flag" will be if you don't support BLM, or made a joke about CHOP in the summer, and as such you have a public health problem of "racism" (remember this is what the left was saying post-George Floyd) and cannot legally own a gun.

I think many western countries have genuine mental health problems. But as you say, I have no interest in red flag laws and I won't budge an inch on the issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeresJohnny

highrider

Member
Dec 18, 2010
11,388
6,488
1,155
53
washington d.c.
Topic of this thread literally says "The Biden Gun Plan". :messenger_grinning_sweat: That's why I used this specific word. We're not in military. We're on internet forum.

It's not a gun. it's a firearm. Sir, yes, sir!

So, still not coming from good faith eh? The I’m trying to find value in your perspective but by all means, focus on how you feel personally slighted.
 

NorwayBot

Member
Aug 3, 2019
211
573
315
To be able to get to the "First" - they've to go for the "Second".

"Freedom of Speech" is what these cockroaches are really after.

Stay frosty!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sign

MrMephistoX

Member
May 18, 2007
5,959
3,134
1,410
Private transactions requiring background checks are unenforceable. There's not enough manpower and local law enforcement has zero interest in helping out the feds on something so obviously ill conceived. This sort of thing has been pushed on the state level a few times, and during the last such incident iirc the state sheriffs said that they 'wont be enforcing it, if it happens'. Nor were the feds particularly interested either because its not like they have the staffing or funding to try and snoop all over the place and figure out who sold a gun to their brother or best friend.

If you want mandatory background checks on a personal transaction level, that's actually enforceable, I'm curious to hear your suggestions. What exactly are you proposing here? And I most sincerely hope the response isn't 'well first we create a database of gun owners and serial numbers..'.

Its enforceable in California you have to compete a PPT at a licensed gun store or private FFL. It takes an extra 20 minutes.

I think even you can admit Parkland was a miss. All I’m suggesting is a 9/11 commission style overhaul so you get information provided by local authorities reported into the FBI and NICS database. People on the terror watch list should also not be able to own them like the San Bernardino shooters: if you’re under investigation by any law enforcement entity sorry no guns until it’s cleared.
 
Last edited:

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
Its enforceable in California you have to compete a PPT at a licensed gun store or private FFL. It takes an extra 20 minutes.

I think even you can admit Parkland was a miss. All I’m suggesting is a 9/11 commission style overhaul so you get information provided by local authorities reported into the FBI and NICS database. People on the terror watch list should also not be able to own them like the San Bernardino shooters: if you’re under investigation by any law enforcement entity sorry no guns until it’s cleared.

There's nothing stopping anyone in California from just selling a gun to a buddy privately and keeping quiet about it. And cops would need probable cause to do anything about it anyway, and how are they to know? Do they just stop and ask every person they talk to who they think has a gun?
 
Last edited:

MrMephistoX

Member
May 18, 2007
5,959
3,134
1,410
There's nothing stopping anyone in California from just selling a gun to a buddy privately and keeping quiet about it. And cops would need probable cause to do anything about it anyway, and how are they to know? Do they just stop and ask every person they talk to who they think has a gun?

They do if you’re black during routine traffic stops ;) The key difference is if your buddy sells you that gun or even if it’s just a random person you met on the internet you both go to jail if you’re caught committing a crime with that firearm which acts as a deterrent. Criminals are always going to buy on the black market but that’s doesn’t mean a crazy dude is going to go through the effort of driving to the bad part of town to buy off the crips arms Dealer.

Its really not that hard: order gun online, ship to FFL do paperwork done. Same for PPTs.

I mean technically I could carry my walther PPK in my pocket and likely wouldn’t get stopped but the minute I pull that gun in self defense justified or not I’m fucked.
 
Last edited:
  • Empathy
Reactions: Mista K

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
They do if you’re black during routine traffic stops ;) The key difference is if your buddy sells you that gun or even if it’s just a random person you met on the internet you both go to jail if you’re caught committing a crime with that firearm which acts as a deterrent. Criminals are always going to buy on the black market but that’s doesn’t mean a crazy dude is going to go through the effort of driving to the bad part of town to buy off the crips arms Dealer.

Its really not that hard: order gun online, ship to FFL do paperwork done. Same for PPTs.

I mean technically I could carry my walther PPK in my pocket and likely wouldn’t get stopped but the minute I pull that gun in self defense justified or not I’m fucked.

Well, this is the part where the Colorado Sheriff departments said 'this isn't happening'. Because the resources necessary to enforce this sort of law, in addition to the invasive nature of any such effective enforcement, would basically strain their resources to their breaking point.

It really is that hard, and that's why it won't ever happen. This is a law that will be passed and written on paper and never meaningfully enforced anywhere. And if criminals are just going to go off and do this anyway, who exactly did you just hinder?

In your own hypothetical you just showed who it would possibly hinder: someone just trying to use a gun in self defense.

There's absolutely no point to any of this. In particular if neighboring states take no part in it.
 
Last edited:

MrMephistoX

Member
May 18, 2007
5,959
3,134
1,410
Well, this is the part where the Colorado Sheriff departments said 'this isn't happening'. Because the resources necessary to enforce this sort of law, in addition to the invasive nature of any such effective enforcement, would basically strain their resources to their breaking point.

It really is that hard, and that's why it won't ever happen. This is a law that will be passed and written on paper and never meaningfully enforced anywhere. And if criminals are just going to go off and do this anyway, who exactly did you just hinder?

In your own hypothetical you just showed who it would possibly hinder: someone just trying to use a gun in self defense.

There's absolutely no point to any of this. In particular if neighboring states take no part in it.

Isn’t that basically throwing your hands up in the air and refusing to come up with any solutions?
I’m not talking the average Joe I’m talking about mass shooters who aren’t playing with a full deck. What do you propose? Most of these guys were on either law enforcement or intelligence radar and our existing systems could have prevented them from buying guns if the information was readily available to all agencies and caused the background check to be denied.
 
Last edited:

Halo is Dead

Member
May 20, 2018
6,730
12,107
770
This would be amazing, but it would never actually happen.
Amazing how you guys just love taxes. Even if you don't buy guns you are essentially pro unnecessary taxation for a right we are guaranteed under the constitution. A gun tax would not stem the tides of mass shootings nor would it reduce gun crimes. Black market guns will become more appealing and you are just hurting more business owners with this unfair tax. All this does is fill the pockets of government, pretending like they care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayK47

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
Isn’t that basically throwing your hands up in the air and refusing to come up with any solutions?
I’m not talking the average Joe I’m talking about mass shooters who aren’t playing with a full deck. What do you propose? Most of these guys were on either law enforcement or intelligence radar and our existing systems could have prevented them from buying guns if the information was readily available to all agencies and caused the background check to be denied.

A hasty and poorly thought out solution is often inferior than no solution.

As for mass shooters, I honestly don't care. Contingent upon your working definition of "mass shooter" it's a vanishingly small occurrence given the US pop size. It creates a media frenzy and feedback cycle, but that doesn't make it a "serious issue" worthy of policy change. Beyond possibly being punitive to the news organizations for giving these people fame and attention and inspiring copycats according to some literature.

Now, if you want to talk about solving the root issues behind crime and mental health decline that's actually something worth talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrMephistoX

MrMephistoX

Member
May 18, 2007
5,959
3,134
1,410
A hasty and poorly thought out solution is often inferior than no solution.

As for mass shooters, I honestly don't care. Contingent upon your working definition of "mass shooter" it's a vanishingly small occurrence given the US pop size. It creates a media frenzy and feedback cycle, but that doesn't make it a "serious issue" worthy of policy change. Beyond possibly being punitive to the news organizations for giving these people fame and attention and inspiring copycats according to some literature.

Now, if you want to talk about solving the root issues behind crime and mental health decline that's actually something worth talking about.

That’s my point I’d actually like our political parties to work on the root causes and mental health in addition closing some loopholes: no bans, no rosters, no waiting periods or red flag laws beyond what’s on the books.

School shootings are a direct result of bullying leading to poor mental health and apathetic school officials IMHO.
 

Razvedka

Member
Oct 20, 2018
377
531
375
That’s my point I’d actually like our political parties to work on the root causes and mental health in addition closing some loopholes: no bans, no rosters, no waiting periods or red flag laws beyond what’s on the books.

School shootings are a direct result of bullying leading to poor mental health and apathetic school officials IMHO.

And I think your aim is noble. But some of these loopholes are no such thing, and the cure involved would be worse than the "disease". At least where private transactions are concerned.

The root of it all is down to broken homes, poverty, education, existing (flawed) laws and the erosion of social trust and societal identity. The real heart of the problems facing the country is going to be some bitter medicine for both sides of the isle.