1. NEW TRADE POLICIES COMING TO FORCE SOON: IMPORTANT READ!: READ HERE

Gun Control

Discussion in 'Debates' started by MurphyAlter, Jun 26, 2015.

  1. zeta

    zeta Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    100
    People own them they are out there.
     
  2. MurphyAlter

    MurphyAlter The Floofiest

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    2,849
    Well let me know next time one is used in a crime in the US.
     
  3. zeta

    zeta Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    100
    Im pretty positive a legal nfa machinegun has never been used in a crime.. let me look
     
  4. MurphyAlter

    MurphyAlter The Floofiest

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    2,849
    Regardless, there are stricter laws on machine guns, and they are used in crimes either never or so rarely as to be essentially unheard of. It helps that there is no manufacture of these guns for the market as well. These are the same kinds of restrictions that need to be on assault rifles. They need to turn into the next machine guns. Rare and expensive collectors items that are no longer made, and are relatively unheard of in crimes.
     
    Exeter likes this.
  5. zeta

    zeta Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    100
    Assault rifles are by definition machine guns full auto
     
  6. MurphyAlter

    MurphyAlter The Floofiest

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    2,849
    You know what I mean.
     
  7. Exeter

    Exeter Cuddly, Snuggly, Slutty Dragon

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    5,060
    Likes Received:
    5,751
    Ive heard somewhere the shooter fired 38 shots in 9 seconds. I don't know what type of enthusiasm that kind of firepower supports but clearly whatever you call the rifle it's a type of weapon that isn't actually helping anyone. When the second amendment was ratified the most powerful rifle in public hands could fire 2 shots in that time if the shooter was a speedy reload. I don't think it should be a complicated issue to suggest that average citizens don't need to kill 32 people in 9 seconds.
     
  8. zeta

    zeta Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    100
    No back then they had cannons and gatling guns
     
  9. Exeter

    Exeter Cuddly, Snuggly, Slutty Dragon

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    5,060
    Likes Received:
    5,751
    Which were definitely not in public hands as per the "most powerful rifle in public hands" part in my last post.
     
    MurphyAlter likes this.
  10. ryan8825

    ryan8825 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    210
    I believe that although the gun laws in Australia might be excessive, it has helped. I am a gun owner and hunter and the amount of loops I have to jump through to do that is amazing. At the same time it's also comforting that everyone apart from criminals with illegal guns have to jump through the same hoops.
    It is true that since the gun buy back, there hasn't been a mass shooting in Australia. But I feel that the same approach would not work in America due to a much much stronger 'heritage with guns' (it's our right to bare arms).
    I think Americas problem is the ease of access to guns, tighter licensing may help but the underlying issue is mental health care.
    I saw a figure the other day that was like only 1/2 - 3/4 of Americans can get mental health care whilst all Americans can get a gun. If you are suffering from a mental illness it should be impossible to get a gun.

    In a lighter note.. An Aussie comedians view on gun control

     

    Attached Files:

    MurphyAlter likes this.
  11. Robert Thompson

    Robert Thompson Reaper of Fallen Toys, Porn King

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,486
    Likes Received:
    750
    The only issue with that picture is i want to hang it on my wall
     
    ryan8825 likes this.
  12. scalie

    scalie back pokin' snake

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Messages:
    2,432
    Likes Received:
    1,685
    so the people who are more likely to shoot people or use guns in the commission of a crime don't follow the rules? who ever could have foreseen that. I agree that people with mental illnesses that are likely to make them disreguard reality or the safety of others shouldn't be allowed to own guns, but I would also extend a ban to anyone on the do not fly list. unfortunately due to current geopolitical events I don't think a flat ban or extreme restrictions on guns would do much to deter mass terror attacks considering a person with a truck or someone in a crowded building with a few cans of gas can kill nearly as many as someone with a gun
     
  13. Exeter

    Exeter Cuddly, Snuggly, Slutty Dragon

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    5,060
    Likes Received:
    5,751
    Yes but which of those happens more frequently?
     
  14. scalie

    scalie back pokin' snake

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Messages:
    2,432
    Likes Received:
    1,685
    true, but with that logic we should also ban or heavily restrict the possession, use, and sales of motor vehicles, alcohol, cigarrettes and potentially poisonous substances
    http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm
     
  15. MurphyAlter

    MurphyAlter The Floofiest

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    2,849
    Well, we're currently working on driverless cars, and even now, you have to be above a certain age and take a reasonably difficult test, and renew your license periodically. We TRIED banning alcohol, but it basically had the same effects as the drug wars, because you can't outright ban an addictive substance and expect it to work, and now we have very specific restrictions on who and when people can use or even posses it. As for smoking, no politician has the balls to ban cigarettes (many have tried, and it usually tanks their popularity, being a bipartisan issue and all) but I would be whole-heartedly in favor of instituting a gradual ban. And most poisonous substances are subject to regulation as to who can and can't buy them, and under what circumstances they can and can't be sold. You have to be over 18 to even buy dry ice.

    Point being, we actually DO try bans and heavy restrictions on things that are useful outside of killing whatever it's pointed at.
     
  16. Exeter

    Exeter Cuddly, Snuggly, Slutty Dragon

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    5,060
    Likes Received:
    5,751
    I think it's a huge logical leap to say firearms have equivalent risks and benefits to motor vehicles and gas. I mean just the utility argument alone is enough to bury that. Guns arguably don't improve anybody's lif in a significant way beyond personal enjoyment, and motor vehicles do, even if there's an inherent risk in taking control of and responsibility for large machines. Trucks continue to carry the lifeblood of our civilization, even if one can be used in a single violent act. Guns on the other hand have in recent years succeeded only in contributing greatly towards the casualty rate of attending school/work/church/movies/bars/Walmart/being black.

    I think there's another argument there, alcohol and cigarettes aren't inherently dangerous to other people in the execution of their functions, it's irresponsible use that creates hazards for the public, regardless of what an individual chooses to expose herself to. I mean, I know the same can be said about firearms, but if anyone can really look at the most advanced, portable, efficient, and easy-to-operate personal weapon ever developed by man, designed exclusively for lethal efficiency and refined over several centuries to become ever more advanced, portable, efficient, and easy-to-operate, and still argue that a cigarette and a gun are the same kind of public menace.... I think they're missing the point of a gun, or at least what it enables, regardless of what responsible hobbyists enjoy them for.

    And I see your stats. It's remarkable that in a country packed with hundreds of millions of cars, firearms, which are in the hands of a relatively small portion of the population have a nearly identical fatality rate. Motor vehicles are intimately coupled to the myriad risks and hazards of the road and the other hundreds of millions of drivers navigating the same risks and hazards on a daily basis. Not all of those firearms fatalities even came from other people using the weapon. It appears a given number of guns are at least as dangerous as a vastly greater number of cars and trucks.

    Blanket bans might not work (even if they do in so many places) but it has to be better than doing nothing and continuing to watch hobbyists defend the political/social standing and importance of weapons to the detriment of children/workers/worshippers/moviegoers/bar patrons/homosexuals/shoppers/black people.
     
    MurphyAlter likes this.
  17. MurphyAlter

    MurphyAlter The Floofiest

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    2,849
  18. Aeristargaryan

    Aeristargaryan Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2018
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    5
    By conservative estimate there are three hundred million guns in private hands in the U.S., so there would be no comparison to be made between what it would take to disarm our populace and that of Australia.
    The second amendment was not put in place to protect our right to shoot for fun or even to hunt for food. I get how silly liberals tend to think the founding fathers were, but let me assure you, they had bigger things on their mind. They were in the process of fighting their own government. Hence the second amendment, to provide a means for the people of America to be more powerful than their own government for generations to come, should it come down to nuts and bolts. Hence the need for military style semi autos in public hands. Fighting a modern government with muskets would be akin to the founders trying to fight off the british by throwing sticks and rocks.
     
  19. Exeter

    Exeter Cuddly, Snuggly, Slutty Dragon

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    5,060
    Likes Received:
    5,751
    Who really cares what a bunch of 300 year old dead slave owners thought about guns. In any stand up fight the US military will decimate any force of americans no matter how many guns they have. The consequence of preparing the populace for this impossible outcome at the behest of the arms manufacturers who pay the NRA is that children die in schools, children die in their homes, children die in the streets, black citizens are routinely assumed to be armed and shot at and next to nobody who owns a gun has ever stopped a crime. So the only upshot I can see is America will be stocked for the zombie apocalypse. I don't think it's worth it. Canada has got along very well for ages without an armed population. As has every other developed country.
     
  20. Aeristargaryan

    Aeristargaryan Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2018
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    5
    The U.S. military plus all the police in the country adds up to about 3 million. They have a hard enough time with an armed insurgency in Iraq sporting Less munitions then they do. We have 100 guns to their one. They could never suppress the American people as a whole without either disarming the populace or leveling the whole Damn county just to rule the ashes.
     

Share This Page