The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control

The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Real0ne -> The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 12:34:27 PM)
Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. (TFC) Washington, DC – A church was shot up by a lunatic. The US government never lets a tragedy or crisis pass without attempting to find a new way to restrict the American people. So, we can expect a renewed push for gun control. There is a lot of propaganda about gun control. So much so that the truth has been lost. The National Rifle Association (NRA) would have you believe that guns stop murders. The gun control lobby would have you believe that gun control reduces murders. They are both wrong. Gun bans have always had the same effect once implemented: none. They do not create a (sustained) period of increased murders, nor do they reduce the rate of homicides. The gun control crowd is currently stomping their feet and screaming “No, it reduces violence! I’ve seen the statistics.” What you probably saw were studies that point to reduced instances of “gun murders,” not murder. The pro-gun crowd is screaming that gun bans cause crime. At least this is grounded in reality. Typically, there is a spike in murders immediately after a ban, but it is short lived. Official MintPress Sponsor Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. Let’s take a look at the data: United Kingdom: The UK enacted its handgun ban in 1996. From 1990 until the ban was enacted, the homicide rate fluctuated between 10.9 and 13 homicides per million. After the ban was enacted, homicides trended up until they reached a peak of 18.0 in 2003. Since 2003, which incidentally was about the time the British government flooded the country with 20,000 more cops, the homicide rate has fallen to 11.1 in 2010. In other words, the 15-year experiment in a handgun ban has achieved absolutely nothing. Ireland: Ireland banned firearms in 1972. Ireland’s homicide rate was fairly static going all the way back to 1945. In that period, it fluctuated between 0.1 and 0.6 per 100,000 people. Immediately after the ban, the murder rate shot up to 1.6 per 100,000 people in 1975. It then dropped back down to 0.4. It has trended up, reaching 1.4 in 2007. Australia: Australia enacted its gun ban in 1996. Murders have basically run flat, seeing only a small spike after the ban and then returning almost immediately to preban numbers. It is currently trending down, but is within the fluctuations exhibited in other nations. (for the countless number of idigits out here that means not enough time has elapsed for the normal trend back up to occur) Plain and simple. Gun control has no significant impact on murder rates. Removing firearms does not typically create massive lawlessness. It is a moot point. These figures aren’t a secret. Why would the governments of these nations want a disarmed populace? For the answer, it is best to look at a nation that has had long-time gun bans that is currently relaxing their laws. Russia recently relaxed its firearms laws. For the first time in recent memory, a Russian citizen can carry a firearm. The prohibited items speak volumes about what a government’s motive behind disarming the population is. Russia has allowed “smoothbore long barrelled guns, pistols, revolvers, and other firearms, as well as Tasers, and devices equipped with teargas.” That’s almost everything, what is still banned? Rifles. So the Russian government has made it clear that the real objective is to remove rifles from civilian hands. The reasoning is pretty clear: you need rifles to overthrow a government. The Real Reason Gun Control Will Never Work: Poverty has a greater correlation to violent crime than access to firearms. Education and poverty are directly linked. In short, we don’t have a gun problem in the United States, we have a cultural problem. Home Depot. Most people in the gun control lobby know nothing about firearms or their construction. Everything you need to manufacture firearms is available at Home Depot. The materials needed to manufacture a 12 gauge shotgun cost about $20. If someone wanted to build a fully automatic Mac-10 style submachine gun, it would probably cost about $60. Every electrician, plumber, and handyman in the country has the materials necessary to manufacture firearms in their shop. The items are completely unregulated. They aren’t like the chemicals necessary to manufacture methamphetamines. How is the battle against that black market working out? We have a society that panders to the basest desires and instincts. One of those is violence. We live in a society where women are given dirty looks for breastfeeding in a restaurant, while over their heads on the wall-mounted television plays a movie that graphically depicts someone being tortured to death. We are desensitized to violence, and we have a generation of people that do not have the coping skills necessary to deal with reality. Firearms are the Pandora’s Box of the United States. The box is open, it can’t be closed through legislation. If you want to change society, you have to actually change the whole of society. You can’t blame an inanimate object that’s availability has absolutely no correlation to murder and expect to end violence. Yep the idiots want to ban guns and what do you think anyone who wants to waste a lot of people will turn to next? Yep you got, bombs. Then what? Ban 99% of household goods to prevent these people from building bombs? But idjit insanity is the rule of the day!

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 2:03:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. Actually.... no. Gun control is specifically designed to stop people from killing each other with easily available (and concealable) tools that are designed to kill and mame at a distance. It doesn't stop murders, that much is true. But look at the stats for the US compared to everywhere else. How many other countries have mass killings compared to the US?? The US has as many in one year alone that other countries count in decades. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne There is a lot of propaganda about gun control. So much so that the truth has been lost. Only lost in America. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. Let’s take a look at the data: United Kingdom: The UK enacted its handgun ban in 1996. From 1990 until the ban was enacted, the homicide rate fluctuated between 10.9 and 13 homicides per million. After the ban was enacted, homicides trended up until they reached a peak of 18.0 in 2003. Since 2003, which incidentally was about the time the British government flooded the country with 20,000 more cops, the homicide rate has fallen to 11.1 in 2010. In other words, the 15-year experiment in a handgun ban has achieved absolutely nothing. Ireland: Ireland banned firearms in 1972. Ireland’s homicide rate was fairly static going all the way back to 1945. In that period, it fluctuated between 0.1 and 0.6 per 100,000 people. Immediately after the ban, the murder rate shot up to 1.6 per 100,000 people in 1975. It then dropped back down to 0.4. It has trended up, reaching 1.4 in 2007. Australia: Australia enacted its gun ban in 1996. Murders have basically run flat, seeing only a small spike after the ban and then returning almost immediately to preban numbers. It is currently trending down, but is within the fluctuations exhibited in other nations. (for the countless number of idigits out here that means not enough time has elapsed for the normal trend back up to occur) You are comparing apples with oranges. How about comparing murders with deaths in general?? Because thats the sort of argument you are trying to make. You just can't compare gun control (specifically designed to curb gun deaths) with murders in general and extrapolate that gun control doesn't work. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Plain and simple. Gun control has no significant impact on murder rates. Removing firearms does not typically create massive lawlessness. It is a moot point. These figures aren’t a secret. Why would the governments of these nations want a disarmed populace? Because I like my kids to be able to go to school that isn't patrolled by armed guards and looks more like a high-security prison than a school. I like to be able to go to the mall, or a church, or wherever, without worrying that there may be a shooter lurking, about to hear voices in his head and let rip on the people around him. I like the idea that should I ever be unfortunate enough to get an intruder, he isn't likely to want to blow my head off to steal my TV because the society is such that he's coming packed. We don't have that kind of problem here because most people don't have firearms at all. You see, unlike the US, we have an effective police force and we aren't paranoid of our government (or our neighbours) enough to want to arm ourselves "just in case" we need to defend ourselves against them. So I would turn the question on its head: Why would a government want an armed populace?? Or maybe: Why do the populace feel the need to have such destructive tools as guns?? quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The Real Reason Gun Control Will Never Work: Poverty has a greater correlation to violent crime than access to firearms. Education and poverty are directly linked. In short, we don’t have a gun problem in the United States, we have a cultural problem. Home Depot. Most people in the gun control lobby know nothing about firearms or their construction. Everything you need to manufacture firearms is available at Home Depot. The materials needed to manufacture a 12 gauge shotgun cost about $20. If someone wanted to build a fully automatic Mac-10 style submachine gun, it would probably cost about $60. Every electrician, plumber, and handyman in the country has the materials necessary to manufacture firearms in their shop. The items are completely unregulated. They aren’t like the chemicals necessary to manufacture methamphetamines. How is the battle against that black market working out? You are dead right about the culture problem. However.... having guns on hand and available as easy as a loaf of bread doesn't help. Plus, of course, you have to be paranoid enough to actually want a gun in the first place. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne We have a society that panders to the basest desires and instincts. One of those is violence. We live in a society where women are given dirty looks for breastfeeding in a restaurant, while over their heads on the wall-mounted television plays a movie that graphically depicts someone being tortured to death. We are desensitized to violence, and we have a generation of people that do not have the coping skills necessary to deal with reality. That last bit is very true. And it's not a 'mental health' issue either despite what the powder-puff brigade want us to believe. It's a simple case of parents not teaching kids how to deal with the reality of the world. Too much cotton-wool approach and "don't stress the widdle kiddie-winks too much". quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Firearms are the Pandora’s Box of the United States. The box is open, it can’t be closed through legislation. Why not?? They've done that in many countries and firearms crimes/deaths/injuries (not to mention mass killings) have plumetted. And don't say it can't be done because of 'the constitution' because there are countries that have scrapped theirs and re-written it to suit modern times and their current situation when the ancient documents are no longer fit for purpose. What was written by man can be un-written or modified. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne If you want to change society, you have to actually change the whole of society. You can’t blame an inanimate object that’s availability has absolutely no correlation to murder and expect to end violence. Yes, you need a dramatic societal change in gun attitudes. As the president said earlier today, there are no other civilized countries in the world that have our level of violence and mass killings; not one. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Yep the idiots want to ban guns and what do you think anyone who wants to waste a lot of people will turn to next? Yep you got, bombs. Then what? Ban 99% of household goods to prevent these people from building bombs? But idjit insanity is the rule of the day! As usual, a gun-nut that can't see anything past his nose. The only insanity I see is American paranoia and an affinity with guns second to none. ...and the highest number of mass-killings anywhere in the world. [8\|]

MrRodgers -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 2:33:32 PM)
Well the Aussie numbers are true in my previous posts and sites. Gun murders and gun violence has dropped dramatically since 1996 when restrictions were passed. Plus we know that to protect yourself and your family is bullshit because for gun ownership in the house to be safe, [it] is for too inaccessible once locked away to provide that safety...to be of any use during a crime in the house.

BamaD -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 2:36:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. Actually.... no. Gun control is specifically designed to stop people from killing each other with easily available (and concealable) tools that are designed to kill and mame at a distance. It doesn't stop murders, that much is true. But look at the stats for the US compared to everywhere else. How many other countries have mass killings compared to the US?? The US has as many in one year alone that other countries count in decades. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne There is a lot of propaganda about gun control. So much so that the truth has been lost. Only lost in America. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. Let’s take a look at the data: United Kingdom: The UK enacted its handgun ban in 1996. From 1990 until the ban was enacted, the homicide rate fluctuated between 10.9 and 13 homicides per million. After the ban was enacted, homicides trended up until they reached a peak of 18.0 in 2003. Since 2003, which incidentally was about the time the British government flooded the country with 20,000 more cops, the homicide rate has fallen to 11.1 in 2010. In other words, the 15-year experiment in a handgun ban has achieved absolutely nothing. Ireland: Ireland banned firearms in 1972. Ireland’s homicide rate was fairly static going all the way back to 1945. In that period, it fluctuated between 0.1 and 0.6 per 100,000 people. Immediately after the ban, the murder rate shot up to 1.6 per 100,000 people in 1975. It then dropped back down to 0.4. It has trended up, reaching 1.4 in 2007. Australia: Australia enacted its gun ban in 1996. Murders have basically run flat, seeing only a small spike after the ban and then returning almost immediately to preban numbers. It is currently trending down, but is within the fluctuations exhibited in other nations. (for the countless number of idigits out here that means not enough time has elapsed for the normal trend back up to occur) You are comparing apples with oranges. How about comparing murders with deaths in general?? Because thats the sort of argument you are trying to make. You just can't compare gun control (specifically designed to curb gun deaths) with murders in general and extrapolate that gun control doesn't work. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Plain and simple. Gun control has no significant impact on murder rates. Removing firearms does not typically create massive lawlessness. It is a moot point. These figures aren’t a secret. Why would the governments of these nations want a disarmed populace? Because I like my kids to be able to go to school that isn't patrolled by armed guards and looks more like a high-security prison than a school. I like to be able to go to the mall, or a church, or wherever, without worrying that there may be a shooter lurking, about to hear voices in his head and let rip on the people around him. I like the idea that should I ever be unfortunate enough to get an intruder, he isn't likely to want to blow my head off to steal my TV because the society is such that he's coming packed. We don't have that kind of problem here because most people don't have firearms at all. You see, unlike the US, we have an effective police force and we aren't paranoid of our government (or our neighbours) enough to want to arm ourselves "just in case" we need to defend ourselves against them. So I would turn the question on its head: Why would a government want an armed populace?? Or maybe: Why do the populace feel the need to have such destructive tools as guns?? quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The Real Reason Gun Control Will Never Work: Poverty has a greater correlation to violent crime than access to firearms. Education and poverty are directly linked. In short, we don’t have a gun problem in the United States, we have a cultural problem. Home Depot. Most people in the gun control lobby know nothing about firearms or their construction. Everything you need to manufacture firearms is available at Home Depot. The materials needed to manufacture a 12 gauge shotgun cost about $20. If someone wanted to build a fully automatic Mac-10 style submachine gun, it would probably cost about $60. Every electrician, plumber, and handyman in the country has the materials necessary to manufacture firearms in their shop. The items are completely unregulated. They aren’t like the chemicals necessary to manufacture methamphetamines. How is the battle against that black market working out? You are dead right about the culture problem. However.... having guns on hand and available as easy as a loaf of bread doesn't help. Plus, of course, you have to be paranoid enough to actually want a gun in the first place. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne We have a society that panders to the basest desires and instincts. One of those is violence. We live in a society where women are given dirty looks for breastfeeding in a restaurant, while over their heads on the wall-mounted television plays a movie that graphically depicts someone being tortured to death. We are desensitized to violence, and we have a generation of people that do not have the coping skills necessary to deal with reality. That last bit is very true. And it's not a 'mental health' issue either despite what the powder-puff brigade want us to believe. It's a simple case of parents not teaching kids how to deal with the reality of the world. Too much cotton-wool approach and "don't stress the widdle kiddie-winks too much". quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Firearms are the Pandora’s Box of the United States. The box is open, it can’t be closed through legislation. Why not?? They've done that in many countries and firearms crimes/deaths/injuries (not to mention mass killings) have plumetted. And don't say it can't be done because of 'the constitution' because there are countries that have scrapped theirs and re-written it to suit modern times and their current situation when the ancient documents are no longer fit for purpose. What was written by man can be un-written or modified. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne If you want to change society, you have to actually change the whole of society. You can’t blame an inanimate object that’s availability has absolutely no correlation to murder and expect to end violence. Yes, you need a dramatic societal change in gun attitudes. As the president said earlier today, there are no other civilized countries in the world that have our level of violence and mass killings; not one. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Yep the idiots want to ban guns and what do you think anyone who wants to waste a lot of people will turn to next? Yep you got, bombs. Then what? Ban 99% of household goods to prevent these people from building bombs? But idjit insanity is the rule of the day! As usual, a gun-nut that can't see anything past his nose. The only insanity I see is American paranoia and an affinity with guns second to none. ...and the highest number of mass-killings anywhere in the world. [8\|] I Eit doesn't matter how many people get murdered it only matters what is used to kill them.

WickedsDesire -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 2:38:39 PM)
My lengthy rebuttal ( dear you have defined your essence with me on this one forever more)guns kill now fukity off. Your counter argument is what, after I examine your lies You quoth UK 10.9 and 13 homicides per million. Did you mean per 100 000 eg UK 1-1.3 versus America of 10.5. Now let us pretend I know fucking idiots in any format. But let us pretend I know no maths whatsoever Is the UK not bested by a factor of 10 by the USA – and you used the IRA? I believe America best the UK by a factor of 20-40 fakes are fakes idiots are idiots sophistry is sophistry A gay man killed 49 (plus) people with a Gatling gun....40 000 will die in America this year from guns. It accounted for 0.1% and what of the 1000 fold minus 1-fuking idiots

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 3:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I Eit doesn't matter how many people get murdered it only matters what is used to kill them. Ok.... lets take homicides as a whole - just for comparison - Intentional Homicides (per 100,000 people), 2011-2015 Australia: 1 UK: 1 USA: 4 Source: Worldbank UNODC murder rates (per 100,000 people), Most recent year Australia: (Rate 1.0), count: 238 UK: (Rate 1.0), count: 602 USA: (Rate 3.9), count: 12,253 Source: Wiki We have strict guns laws and our murder rates (generally) are better than 20x lower than the USA. These aren't gun murders as a gun statistic, it is murder rates as a whole. And no, you can't use the argument that the US is bigger thereby having bigger numbers - it is per 100,000 people of the population. So by severely resticting a killing tool (guns) reduces murders.

Kirata -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 3:32:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Intentional Homicides (per 100,000 people), 2011-2015 Australia: 1 UK: 1 USA: 4 Source: Worldbank UNODC murder rates (per 100,000 people), Most recent year Australia: (Rate 1.0), count: 238 UK: (Rate 1.0), count: 602 USA: (Rate 3.9), count: 12,253 Source: Wiki We have strict guns laws and our murder rates (generally) are better than 20x lower than the USA. Good grief. K.

BamaD -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 3:52:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Well the Aussie numbers are true in my previous posts and sites. Gun murders and gun violence has dropped dramatically since 1996 when restrictions were passed. Plus we know that to protect yourself and your family is bullshit because for gun ownership in the house to be safe, [it] is for too inaccessible once locked away to provide that safety...to be of any use during a crime in the house. I grew up in a house with at least half a dozen loaded guns at all times. No gun safes in those days so we knew how to act around guns before we could lift them. Right if they are locked up like you want they are useless, if it is beside my bed it isn't. They are only usless in your world.

BamaD -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 3:58:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I Eit doesn't matter how many people get murdered it only matters what is used to kill them. Ok.... lets take homicides as a whole - just for comparison - Intentional Homicides (per 100,000 people), 2011-2015 Australia: 1 UK: 1 USA: 4 Source: Worldbank UNODC murder rates (per 100,000 people), Most recent year Australia: (Rate 1.0), count: 238 UK: (Rate 1.0), count: 602 USA: (Rate 3.9), count: 12,253 Source: Wiki We have strict guns laws and our murder rates (generally) are better than 20x lower than the USA. These aren't gun murders as a gun statistic, it is murder rates as a whole. And no, you can't use the argument that the US is bigger thereby having bigger numbers - it is per 100,000 people of the population. So by severely resticting a killing tool (guns) reduces murders. No the measure of success is the before and after comparison. I know that we have discussed it before and you don't understand if the before and after your 100 murders is still 100 murders just with different weapons. You have 100 (percapita) replacing the 100 you had before. For every 100 (percapita) we had when you passed those laws we now have 50 (percapita) you aren't doing as good a job fixing the crime problem as we have.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 4:00:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I Eit doesn't matter how many people get murdered it only matters what is used to kill them. Ok.... lets take homicides as a whole - just for comparison - Intentional Homicides (per 100,000 people), 2011-2015 Australia: 1 UK: 1 USA: 4 Source: Worldbank UNODC murder rates (per 100,000 people), Most recent year Australia: (Rate 1.0), count: 238 UK: (Rate 1.0), count: 602 USA: (Rate 3.9), count: 12,253 Source: Wiki We have strict guns laws and our murder rates (generally) are better than 20x lower than the USA. These aren't gun murders as a gun statistic, it is murder rates as a whole. And no, you can't use the argument that the US is bigger thereby having bigger numbers - it is per 100,000 people of the population. So by severely resticting a killing tool (guns) reduces murders. Correlation does not prove causation. http://crimeresearch.org/2014/03/comparing-murder-rates-across-countries/ There there is this: [image]http://www.gunsandcrime.org/homihisty.gif[/image] Gun homicides went down, but total homicides went up. "You know, we're real sorry your loved one was killed. But, look at the bright side; at least your loved one wasn't shot to death!"

mnottertail -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 4:03:08 PM)
No we have 3.09 and they have 1. Thats is thats all, thats all in all done. we have three times plus their murder rate. Their passing laws will not affect us, since there is no causal or correlated relationship in that instance.

BamaD -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 4:06:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail No we have 3.09 and they have 1. Thats is thats all, thats all in all done. we have three times plus their murder rate. Their passing laws will not affect us, since there is no causal or correlated relationship in that instance. And when they passed thier laws we had nearly 8 to one so there crime rate is the same that is replacing 100 with 100 ours is cut in half that is replacing 100 with 50, come on even you knew that and even you can calculate it.

mnottertail -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 4:07:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail No we have 3.09 and they have 1. Thats is thats all, thats all in all done. we have three times plus their murder rate. Their passing laws will not affect us, since there is no causal or correlated relationship in that instance. Theirs did not go up, as you see the line both of them trend down. BTW one is a rolling 3 year average, one is a straight count per capita, and that compares apples to oranges and gives a picture that is out of focus.

MasterBrentC -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 4:16:59 PM)
How about we take away the Secret Service's guns while they protect the president and all politicians? Next we can take away all the F.B.I.'s guns and all other armed federal agencies guns. Next we can take away each state police officers gun and county sheriff's deputies guns and then all the local police departments guns. If we start taking away guns, who's going to protect us from the bad guys? Me and my gun is very capable of defending myself, thank you very much.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 5:15:47 PM)
Wow you're an idiot. Again . . . who's saying people shouldn't have guns? Exactly no one. Now, perhaps we can be more careful about who has weaponry capable of spewing bullets into crowds. Hard to see how that interferes with law enforcement having firearms. Except for you.

ifmaz -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 5:45:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Wow you're an idiot. Again . . . who's saying people shouldn't have guns? Exactly no one. Now, perhaps we can be more careful about who has weaponry capable of spewing bullets into crowds. Hard to see how that interferes with law enforcement having firearms. Except for you. It always starts with limiting rights just a little For The Good Of The People and it nearly always ends with the near-complete destruction of a right the country was founded on. For example, the Patriot act. What's the harm in letting government read a few emails of suspected terrorists -- we'll follow the 4th Amendment, pinky-promise! Fast-forward a few years and the NSA is reading everyone's emails, text messages, Facebook posts, etc. What's the harm in classifying suspected terrorists as enemy combatants -- we'll still adhere to the 8th Amendment, swearsies! Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, secret places in Chicago that 'disappear' people, secret courts with twisted interpretations of rights, etc. What's the harm in not letting suspected terrorists buy guns -- we'll follow the 2nd Amendment. Promise.

mrevibo -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 5:49:53 PM)
Then look at such places as Mexico, Venezuela (Caracas is the gun violence capitol of the world currently) etc., where there are literally bans on private ownership of firearms. You want mass shootings? They have them weekly in Mexico. It's not the availability of guns that's the problem, it's the culture, or subcultures, of violence that are the problem. Trying to ban them utterly, when there's a motivation to have them, is an illusion. I myself have a full machine shop in my garage capable of making anything I want to peacetime standards, nevermind welding some scrap metal together to wartime standards. Look at the Khyber Pass gun market. They turn out a credible product with machining technology hardly above rubbing the metal on a cinderblock, and load their ammunition with hammers.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 6:09:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ifmaz quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Wow you're an idiot. Again . . . who's saying people shouldn't have guns? Exactly no one. Now, perhaps we can be more careful about who has weaponry capable of spewing bullets into crowds. Hard to see how that interferes with law enforcement having firearms. Except for you. It always starts with limiting rights just a little For The Good Of The People and it nearly always ends with the near-complete destruction of a right the country was founded on. For example, the Patriot act. What's the harm in letting government read a few emails of suspected terrorists -- we'll follow the 4th Amendment, pinky-promise! Fast-forward a few years and the NSA is reading everyone's emails, text messages, Facebook posts, etc. What's the harm in classifying suspected terrorists as enemy combatants -- we'll still adhere to the 8th Amendment, swearsies! Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, secret places in Chicago that 'disappear' people, secret courts with twisted interpretations of rights, etc. What's the harm in not letting suspected terrorists buy guns -- we'll follow the 2nd Amendment. Promise. What bullshit. By that "logic" (slippery slope is a classic logical fallacy), ANY law would mean that everything will be illegal. Yet...it isn't. Your "logic" also implies that to prevent tragedies, we should do nothing. Kind of a flawed plan.

mnottertail -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 6:15:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC How about we take away the Secret Service's guns while they protect the president and all politicians? Next we can take away all the F.B.I.'s guns and all other armed federal agencies guns. Next we can take away each state police officers gun and county sheriff's deputies guns and then all the local police departments guns. If we start taking away guns, who's going to protect us from the bad guys? Me and my gun is very capable of defending myself, thank you very much. Try and take away anyones guns you want, of course you are the only one.

mnottertail -> RE: The Facts That Neither Side Admits About Gun Control (6/16/2016 6:17:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ifmaz quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Wow you're an idiot. Again . . . who's saying people shouldn't have guns? Exactly no one. Now, perhaps we can be more careful about who has weaponry capable of spewing bullets into crowds. Hard to see how that interferes with law enforcement having firearms. Except for you. It always starts with limiting rights just a little For The Good Of The People and it nearly always ends with the near-complete destruction of a right the country was founded on. For example, the Patriot act. What's the harm in letting government read a few emails of suspected terrorists -- we'll follow the 4th Amendment, pinky-promise! Fast-forward a few years and the NSA is reading everyone's emails, text messages, Facebook posts, etc. What's the harm in classifying suspected terrorists as enemy combatants -- we'll still adhere to the 8th Amendment, swearsies! Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, secret places in Chicago that 'disappear' people, secret courts with twisted interpretations of rights, etc. What's the harm in not letting suspected terrorists buy guns -- we'll follow the 2nd Amendment. Promise. Sort of like the rolling thru stop sign laws have taken away all our freedoms and made us a nation of slaves to the tyrannical municipalities.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625